Skip to content

chore(deploy): bump prod tutorials-srv instances 2->4 for launch load - #1643

Merged
jung-thomas merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
worktree-srv-instances-4
Aug 11, 2026
Merged

jung-thomas merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
worktree-srv-instances-4

Conversation

@jung-thomas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

What

Bump prod tutorials-srv from 2 → 4 instances in deploy/prod.mtaext. Approuter stays at 2. Patch version bump 1.13.4 → 1.13.5.

Why

Prod tutorials-srv is already running 4 instances (verified live via cf app) to absorb developers.sap.com site-launch load, but prod.mtaext pinned it to 2 — so the next cf deploy would have reverted it to 2. This reconciles config to the running state, same treatment as the disk-quota fix (#1635).

⚠️ Rate-limiter caveat (noted inline in the mtaext)

The rate limiters in srv/lib/ip-rate-limit.js and srv/lib/chat-rate-limit.js are in-process, so at 4 instances the per-instance caps run at ~4× the intended aggregate. Accepted as launch headroom here; the base mta.yaml comment flags this. Follow-up if 4 becomes steady state: move those limits to a shared store.

Changes

  • deploy/prod.mtaext: tutorials-srv instances: 2 → 4 (+ rationale comment)
  • .deploy/mta.yaml: version 1.13.4 → 1.13.5

No code changes; deploy config only.

Reconcile prod.mtaext with a live cockpit `cf scale`: prod tutorials-srv
is running 4 instances for developers.sap.com site-launch load, but the
pin was 2 — the next deploy would have reverted it. Bake in 4 so it
sticks. Approuter left at 2.

Rate-limiter caveat noted inline: ip-rate-limit.js + chat-rate-limit.js
are in-process, so caps now run per-instance at 4x aggregate; accepted
as launch headroom.

Patch bump 1.13.4 -> 1.13.5.
@jung-thomas
jung-thomas merged commit 40a7437 into main Aug 11, 2026
4 checks passed
@jung-thomas
jung-thomas deleted the worktree-srv-instances-4 branch August 13, 2026 15:26
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant