Codebase MCP Server

# Phase 06: Performance Validation & Testing ## Problem Statement After refactoring the codebase (removing 60% of code, adding multi-project support, implementing connection pooling), we must verify that performance has not regressed. Without comparing against the Phase 00 baseline, we won't know if our changes introduced performance problems. The new multi-project and connection pooling features need stress testing to ensure they work under load. If performance regressed, we need to identify and fix issues before release. ## User Stories ### As a Product Manager I want confirmation that performance meets constitutional targets (60s indexing, 500ms search), so that I can confidently approve the v2.0 release. ### As a Quality Assurance Engineer I want performance comparison against Phase 00 baseline, so that I can verify no regression occurred during refactoring. ### As a System Administrator I want multi-tenant stress test results, so that I understand how the system behaves when MAX_PROJECTS is exceeded and LRU eviction occurs. ### As a Developer I want performance profiling data if regression is detected, so that I can identify and fix performance bottlenecks before release. ### As a User I want assurance that search remains fast (<500ms) even with multiple projects active, so that my workflows aren't disrupted by the v2.0 upgrade. ## Success Criteria ### Constitutional Performance Targets Met - Indexing: <60 seconds for 10,000 files (p95) - Search: <500ms latency (p95) - Both targets verified with benchmarks ### No Performance Regression - Indexing time within 10% of Phase 00 baseline - Search latency within 10% of Phase 00 baseline - Memory usage comparable to baseline - If regression >10%, root cause identified and fixed ### Multi-Tenant Stress Tests Pass - 3+ projects indexed concurrently without errors - 100+ queries across projects without errors - MAX_PROJECTS+5 handled gracefully (LRU eviction works) - Database isolation verified (no cross-contamination) ### Performance Report Created - Baseline vs current comparison (indexing, search) - Multi-tenant stress test results - Memory usage analysis - Connection pool efficiency metrics - Regression analysis (if any) - Optimization recommendations (if needed) ### Benchmark Scripts Available - Indexing benchmark script created and tested - Search benchmark script created and tested - Multi-tenant stress test script created and tested - Scripts use same methodology as Phase 00 for fair comparison ## Constraints ### Same Benchmark Methodology as Phase 00 - Use same test repository (10,000 files, seed=42) - Use same search queries (100 queries) - Use same metrics (p50, p95, p99) - Fair comparison requires identical conditions ### Constitutional Performance Targets (NON-NEGOTIABLE) - From Constitution Principle #4: Performance Guarantees - Indexing: 60s (p95) is maximum acceptable - Search: 500ms (p95) is maximum acceptable - Targets cannot be relaxed without constitutional amendment ### Regression Tolerance - Up to 10% slower is acceptable (accounts for measurement variance) - >10% regression requires investigation and fix - Any regression must be documented and justified ### Multi-Tenant Tests Must Be Realistic - Test with realistic workloads (concurrent operations) - Test with limits exceeded (stress conditions) - Test with various project counts (3, 10, 15+) ## Out of Scope ### Not Included in This Phase - New feature development (all features complete) - Documentation updates (already done in Phase 05) - Release preparation (that's Phase 07) ### Explicitly NOT Doing - Performance tuning for new features (future work) - Infrastructure scaling recommendations - Cost analysis or optimization - Profiling every code path (only if regression detected) ## Business Value ### Risk Mitigation Before Release Catching performance regressions before v2.0 release prevents user complaints, emergency hotfixes, and reputational damage. ### Validates Architectural Choices Stress testing multi-project support and connection pooling validates that our architectural decisions work correctly under load. ### Provides Release Confidence Performance data gives stakeholders confidence to approve the v2.0 release, knowing the refactoring maintained quality. ### Establishes v2.0 Baseline This phase creates a new performance baseline for v2.0, which will be used to detect future regressions. ### Identifies Optimization Opportunities Even if targets are met, the performance report may identify optimization opportunities for future releases. ## Additional Context This phase corresponds to Phase 11 from FINAL-IMPLEMENTATION-PLAN.md. It should take 4-6 hours to complete and depends on Phase 05 (documentation complete, all features implemented). Benchmarks should be run on the same hardware as Phase 00 for fair comparison. If hardware changed, baseline should be re-run on new hardware before comparison. If performance regression >10% is detected: 1. Profile the code to identify bottleneck 2. Check PostgreSQL slow query log 3. Analyze query execution plans (EXPLAIN ANALYZE) 4. Optimize based on findings 5. Re-run benchmarks to verify fix The multi-tenant stress test should push the system beyond normal operating conditions to verify graceful degradation (LRU eviction, error handling) rather than crashes or data corruption. Connection pool efficiency should be monitored: high cache hit rate indicates good locality, high eviction rate may indicate MAX_PROJECTS is too low.