docs: story iterations 11-12 (fibers, blue-green deploy)

This commit is contained in:
shoney.arickathil 2026-08-10 09:58:52 +02:00
parent 77060b6b0a
commit 97adff7980
2 changed files with 146 additions and 0 deletions

View file

@ -0,0 +1,78 @@
# Iteration 11 — fibers (green threads on the shard scheduler)
> Format: fiberloom `product/story-iteration-template`. Part of
> [Story — one language, one runtime, one database, one binary](00-story.md).
## Goals
- Concurrency **inside** a shard the doctrine way: cooperative fibers
scheduled by the VM — a fiber is the interpreter state wovm already
isolates (register windows + frame stack + pc), made per-fiber. One
kernel task per core stays the rule; thousands of fibers run above it
where the kernel tops out at hundreds of threads (CFS O(log N),
~8 MiB + ~20 µs per thread vs an arena-allocated fiber context).
- **Preemption by reduction budget**, the Erlang shape: the dispatch loop
counts down and parks the fiber at zero — no signals, no safepoints, no
stack copying, deterministic replay.
- **Blocking builtins park instead of block** on server shards: the same
`net`/`time`/`fs` calls that block the thread in program mode hand their
fd to the shard's epoll/io_uring loop and resume on completion. One API,
same source text, no async/await, no function coloring — ever.
- Cross-fiber sends follow the iteration 8 rule — ownership moves — on the
cheaper same-heap path.
## Acceptance Criteria
- What to achieve?
- **Given** a shard running thousands of spawned fibers with one hot
compute loop among them,
- **when** the reduction budget expires,
- **then** the hot fiber parks, every other fiber makes progress
(starvation-free corpus fixture), and output is identical across
runs (deterministic scheduling).
- What to achieve?
- **Given** a fiber blocked in a stdlib builtin on a server shard,
- **when** the completion arrives on the shard's event loop,
- **then** the fiber resumes with the result while the shard served
other fibers in the interim — one OS thread, verified by TID.
- What to achieve?
- **Given** a parked fiber at shard shutdown,
- **when** the shard unwinds it,
- **then** every drop map runs (ASan zero leaks) — parked fibers die
as cleanly as trapped ones. (Iteration 12's blue-green drain reuses
exactly this unwind path.)
- What to achieve?
- **Given** `@gc` objects referenced only from a parked fiber's frames,
- **when** the per-shard cycle collector scans,
- **then** fiber stacks are roots — nothing live is collected, nothing
dead survives.
## Out Of Scope
- Fiber migration across shards (ownership doctrine forbids it; cross-shard
is a message send, iteration 8).
- Priorities, timers, structured-concurrency policy — recipe-box
capabilities for a later `.wo` library, not runtime policy.
- Program mode: stays single-fiber in v1 (blocking legal, log-watcher
needs nothing more).
- async/await keyword — permanently rejected surface, not deferred.
## Info
- Research note: [`docs/plan/exploration/fibers/00-fibers.md`](../../plan/exploration/fibers/00-fibers.md)
— kernel's-eye evidence (task_struct costs, CFS collapse at high task
counts) and the precedent survey (BEAM reductions adopted; Go stack
copying and Tokio coloring rejected; Loom's park-under-blocking-API
matches the stdlib posture).
- Vision origin: [blue-green vision §3](../../plan/exploration/blue-green-vm/00-vision.md);
iteration 8's scheduler is the substrate this extends.
- Open questions to settle in the spec: spawn surface (handle vs actor
address), budget size and check granularity, parked-fiber drop
semantics, run-queue fairness (FIFO v1).
## Proposed Solution
- No implementation plan exists yet — this iteration starts with the
brainstorming → spec → writing-plans chain (the superpowers path every
prior iteration followed), then executes that plan. The research note
above is the brainstorm's entry material.

View file

@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
# Iteration 12 — blue-green in-runtime deployment
> Format: fiberloom `product/story-iteration-template`. Part of
> [Story — one language, one runtime, one database, one binary](00-story.md).
## Goals
- The story's closing promise: the running binary updates its own code.
Two fixed VM slots (activity alternating); a proposal pipeline —
propose → approve → in-runtime compile → additive schema migration →
load → health → atomic switch — with the previous version staying
resident as the instant rollback target.
- The developer drives it remotely: `wo remote pull / propose / diff /
approve / rollback / status` over a loopback management transport,
every stage streaming live and WAL-audited.
## Acceptance Criteria
- What to achieve?
- **Given** a running fixture app and an additive code+schema change,
- **when** the developer proposes and approves it,
- **then** the deploy completes with zero dropped requests (in-flight
work — including parked fibers — drains on the old slot through
iteration 11's unwind path), and the binary's embedded source
trailer matches the new active version afterward.
- What to achieve?
- **Given** a failure at any pipeline stage (compile diagnostic,
destructive-change rejection, load failure, health failure, drain
timeout),
- **when** it occurs,
- **then** the active slot keeps serving untouched, the failure is
visible in the SSE stream and the WAL trail, and a destructive
change was rejected at propose time naming the offending
declaration.
- What to achieve?
- **Given** a completed deploy,
- **when** `wo remote rollback` runs,
- **then** the previous version serves again in under one second with
no compile and no data change — additive-only migration guarantees
old code runs correctly against the migrated schema.
- What to achieve?
- **Given** kill -9 during COMPILING / MIGRATING / SWITCHING /
trailer-rewrite,
- **when** the unit restarts,
- **then** it serves one consistent version and the WAL shows whole
migrations only.
## Out Of Scope
- Script-based/destructive migrations, in-runtime editing workspace,
MCP/agent wrapper over the management plane — all recorded follow-ups.
- New scheduler work — fibers landed in iteration 11; this iteration's
drain unwinds parked fibers through 11's shutdown path, it does not
extend it.
## Info
- Approved spec: `docs/superpowers/specs/2026-08-03-blue-green-vm-design.md`;
its implementation plan is deliberately authored only after iterations
9–10 ship (prerequisites: a catalog to diff, HTTP machinery to build on).
- VMs own code; the engine owns data — the separation that makes the
switch cheap and rollback unconditional.
## Proposed Solution
- Author the implementation plan from the approved spec once iterations
9–10 land, then execute it (slots, deploy state machine, additive
differ, management surface + SSE, `wo remote` verbs, crash battery).