Skip to content

Performance and Scaling

Performance work should preserve the deterministic and contract-driven behavior the package already promises.

This page keeps optimization work honest. A package is not healthier if it gets faster by becoming harder to reason about, harder to replay, or easier to break for downstream readers.

Treat the operations pages for bijux-canon-ingest as the package's explicit operating memory. They should make common tasks repeatable without relearning the workflow from logs or oral history.

Visual Summary

graph TD
    A[Performance and Scaling] --> B[Profile ingest workload]
    B --> C[Find bottleneck]
    C --> D[Optimize processing path]
    D --> E[Re-measure against baseline]
    E --> F[Accept scalable change]

Performance Review Anchors

  • inspect workflow modules before optimizing boundary code blindly
  • use the package tests that exercise realistic workloads
  • treat artifact and contract drift as a regression even when performance improves

Test Anchors

  • tests/unit for module-level behavior across processing, retrieval, and interfaces
  • tests/e2e for package boundary coverage
  • tests/invariants for long-lived repository promises
  • tests/eval for corpus-backed behavior checks

Concrete Anchors

  • packages/bijux-canon-ingest/pyproject.toml for package metadata
  • packages/bijux-canon-ingest/README.md for local package framing
  • packages/bijux-canon-ingest/tests for executable operational backstops

Use This Page When

  • you are installing, running, diagnosing, or releasing the package
  • you need repeatable operational anchors rather than architectural framing
  • you are responding to package behavior in local work, CI, or incident pressure

Decision Rule

Use Performance and Scaling to decide whether a maintainer can repeat the package workflow from checked-in assets instead of memory. If a step works only because someone already knows the trick, the workflow is not documented clearly enough yet.

What This Page Answers

  • how bijux-canon-ingest is installed, run, diagnosed, and released in practice
  • which checked-in files and tests anchor the operational story
  • where a maintainer should look first when the package behaves differently

Reviewer Lens

  • verify that setup, workflow, and release statements still match package metadata and current commands
  • check that operational guidance still points at real diagnostics and validation paths
  • confirm that maintainer advice still works under current local and CI expectations

Honesty Boundary

This page explains how bijux-canon-ingest is expected to be operated, but it does not replace package metadata, actual runtime behavior, or validation in a real environment. A workflow is only trustworthy if a maintainer can still repeat it from the checked-in assets named here.

Next Checks

  • move to interfaces when the operational path depends on a specific surface contract
  • move to quality when the question becomes whether the workflow is sufficiently proven
  • move back to architecture when operational complexity suggests a structural problem

Purpose

This page records the posture for performance work in bijux-canon-ingest.

Stability

Keep it aligned with the package's actual performance-sensitive paths and validation surfaces.