[AWS] Story 7: Production Readiness

[mfittko]

Problem Statement

Before production cutover, the AWS deployment needs objective proof that it can
handle expected load, meet security requirements, and be operated or rolled back
safely.

Scope

In scope:

• Performance validation
• Security review and findings triage
• Runbooks and operating guidance
• Rollback proof and go or no-go sign-off

Out of scope:

• New platform capabilities beyond readiness validation
• Multi-region disaster recovery program
• Post-launch optimization work

Technical Approach

• Use the existing benchmark tooling for representative load tests.
• Validate alerting, rollback, and runbooks in a controlled environment.
• Record a go or no-go decision with explicit residual risks.

Dependencies

Hard dependencies:

• Data layer
• Compute layer
• Networking layer
• Observability layer
• CI/CD pipeline
  Role in tree:
• Final gate for this epic

Acceptance Criteria

• Load test shows acceptable performance
• Security review has no critical findings
• All runbooks created and reviewed
• Go-live checklist fully complete
• Production deployment successful

Proposed Definition Of Done

• Benchmark report with p50, p95, p99, throughput, and error rate is attached.
• Security findings summary and disposition are attached.
• Runbook index and review sign-off are attached.
• Rollback test evidence and final go or no-go record are attached.

Validation Plan

1. Run benchmark scenarios that represent expected production traffic.
2. Record latency, throughput, cache, and error-rate results.
3. Review IAM, secrets, encryption, and network controls.
4. Trigger at least one test alarm and verify notification and recovery.
5. Execute rollback in a non-production environment.
6. Record the final go or no-go decision with owners.

Numeric Exit Thresholds

• p95 latency target: document in this issue before execution starts
• Error-rate target: document in this issue before execution starts
• Throughput target: document in this issue before execution starts
• Open findings at sign-off: Critical = 0, High = 0 unless waived explicitly

Risks And Mitigations

• Risk: acceptable performance remains subjective.
  • Mitigation: Fill in the numeric thresholds before execution begins.
• Risk: runbooks exist but are not operationally useful.
  • Mitigation: Require review sign-off and one rollback rehearsal.

Handoff Notes

This issue is the epic close gate. If any threshold or sign-off item is missing,
the epic remains open.

AC/DoD Coverage Matrix

Item	Type (AC/DoD/Non-goal)	Status (Met/Partial/Unmet/Unverified)	Evidence (spec/tests/behavior)	Notes
Load test shows acceptable performance	AC	Unverified	Benchmark report	Source AC
Security review has no critical findings	AC	Unverified	Security review	Source AC
All runbooks created and reviewed	AC	Unverified	Runbook index	Source AC
Go-live checklist fully complete	AC	Unverified	Final checklist	Source AC
Production deployment successful	AC	Unverified	Go-live evidence	Source AC
Benchmark report with p50, p95, p99, throughput, and error rate is attached.	DoD	Unverified	Issue evidence	Proposed DoD
Security findings summary and disposition are attached.	DoD	Unverified	Issue evidence	Proposed DoD
Runbook index and review sign-off are attached.	DoD	Unverified	Issue evidence	Proposed DoD
Rollback test evidence and final go or no-go record are attached.	DoD	Unverified	Issue evidence	Proposed DoD

[mfittko]

Refinement update applied. This issue now has explicit scope, hard dependencies, measurable acceptance criteria, a proposed Definition of Done, a validation plan, and an AC/DoD coverage matrix so it is ready for assignment.