Skip to content

test: add proxy scale and concurrency coverage #70

Description

@RentnerKev

Summary

Validate correctness, recovery, and bounded resource behavior with larger configurations and
concurrent management operations. This is not a benchmark contest and does not authorize invented
performance targets.

Workloads

Select and document realistic sizes from observed runtime cost, including:

The existing suggestion of roughly 100 Proxy Hosts is a starting scenario, not an unsupported
product guarantee.

Verify

  • final desired revision wins and the active Caddy revision matches it
  • no lost updates, duplicate application, or concurrent apply corruption
  • generated Caddy JSON remains valid
  • API/UI requests complete within bounded test time without deadlock or starvation
  • restart and transient failure recovery converge correctly
  • queues, memory, CPU, connections, and file descriptors remain bounded within the documented
    workload envelope
  • Basic Auth, IP policies, certificates, HTTP/3, and shipped Beta integrations retain correct
    behavior

Acceptance criteria

Priority and sequencing

P1. Build on the current revision/reconciliation and smoke-test foundations. Keep this
correctness-at-scale work distinct from the long-duration soak in #69. Results gate #75.

Activity

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    area: ciContinuous integration and GitHub automation.area: proxyProxy host configuration and request forwarding.area: runtimeCaddy and privileged controller runtime behavior.relatedRelated work that is not a confirmed duplicate.

    Projects

    No projects

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions