8 KiB
XCE Cluster Management System
Overview
XCE is an HPC cluster management system providing job scheduling, queue management, and cluster resource control. The Go-based API/CLI tier fronts C/C++ system daemons (controller, worker, scheduler).
Tech Stack
- Go 1.23.4: REST API server (
src/frontend/apiserver), CLI tool (src/frontend/xcecli) - C/C++: Core daemons — controller, worker, scheduler, shared lib
- Build: Meson + Nix flakes for C components;
makefor Go components - Go key deps: Gin v1.10.0, JWT v4, Zap logging, Viper config, Cobra CLI
Development Commands
# From src/frontend/
make build-server # Build apiserver binary → /tmp/apiserver
make build-cli # Build xcecli binary → /tmp/xce_static (CGO_ENABLED=0)
make test # Unit tests (no live server required)
make test-integration # Regression suite (requires XCE_BIN and SRV_URL env vars)
make test-all # Unit + integration tests
# Full dev build — all components (from src/)
nix develop # Enter dev environment
meson setup build && ninja -C build # Build everything (all components)
# Nix package builds (from src/)
nix build --option sandbox false .#xcecore # C daemons + frontend/apiserver
nix build --option sandbox false .#xcecore_debug # Same with debug/ASAN
nix build --option sandbox false .#xcecli # CLI tool only
Test-Driven Development
Follow TDD strictly throughout the full development process:
- Red — Write a failing test that specifies the desired behaviour before writing any implementation code.
- Green — Write the minimal implementation to make the test pass. Do not over-engineer.
- Refactor — Clean up the implementation and tests while keeping all tests green.
Rules
- Never implement a feature without a corresponding test written first.
- Tests must be runnable without a live server or external services (use table-driven tests, stubs, and
t.TempDir()for fixtures). - A change is not complete until
make test(andmake test-integrationwhere applicable) passes. - For C components, add a test case in the relevant
testsuite/before modifying the implementation. - Tests live next to the code they cover (
_test.gofor Go,testsuite/for C). - Keep test scope narrow — unit-test business logic; use integration tests for HTTP/API surface.
Architecture
Request → Gin Router → Middleware (CORS/RateLimit/IPWhitelist/JWT) → RBAC Check → Controller → Services → In-Memory Store
- 3 independent Go modules:
apiserver,xcecli,bcctool(no go.work) - Stateful API server: in-memory stores seeded at startup via
store.LoadBuiltinData() - Pluggable auth: configfile / LDAP / OAuth2 / PAM (set in
config/auth.yaml) - RBAC: domain-based role-action-domain model loaded from
config/rbac.yaml
Key Files
src/frontend/Makefile— primary build/test orchestrationsrc/frontend/apiserver/cmd/main.go— server startup, init sequencesrc/frontend/apiserver/router/routers.go— all routes and middleware chainsrc/frontend/apiserver/controllers/rbac_check.go— RBAC loading and enforcementsrc/frontend/apiserver/config/rbac.yaml— role/permission definitionssrc/frontend/apiserver/config/auth.yaml— auth provider selection
Subdirectory Guidelines
src/frontend/— Seesrc/frontend/CLAUDE.mdsrc/controller/— Seesrc/controller/CLAUDE.mdsrc/worker/— Seesrc/worker/CLAUDE.mdsrc/scheduler/— Seesrc/scheduler/CLAUDE.mdsrc/lib/— Seesrc/lib/CLAUDE.md
MCP Tools: code-review-graph
IMPORTANT: This project has a knowledge graph. ALWAYS use the code-review-graph MCP tools BEFORE using Grep/Glob/Read to explore the codebase. The graph is faster, cheaper (fewer tokens), and gives you structural context (callers, dependents, test coverage) that file scanning cannot.
When to use graph tools FIRST
- Exploring code:
semantic_search_nodesorquery_graphinstead of Grep - Understanding impact:
get_impact_radiusinstead of manually tracing imports - Code review:
detect_changes+get_review_contextinstead of reading entire files - Finding relationships:
query_graphwith callers_of/callees_of/imports_of/tests_for - Architecture questions:
get_architecture_overview+list_communities
Fall back to Grep/Glob/Read only when the graph doesn't cover what you need.
Key Tools
| Tool | Use when |
|---|---|
detect_changes |
Reviewing code changes — gives risk-scored analysis |
get_review_context |
Need source snippets for review — token-efficient |
get_impact_radius |
Understanding blast radius of a change |
get_affected_flows |
Finding which execution paths are impacted |
query_graph |
Tracing callers, callees, imports, tests, dependencies |
semantic_search_nodes |
Finding functions/classes by name or keyword |
get_architecture_overview |
Understanding high-level codebase structure |
refactor_tool |
Planning renames, finding dead code |
Workflow
- The graph auto-updates on file changes (via hooks).
- Use
detect_changesfor code review. - Use
get_affected_flowsto understand impact. - Use
query_graphpattern="tests_for" to check coverage.
graphify
This project has a graphify knowledge graph at graphify-out/.
Rules:
- Before answering architecture or codebase questions, read graphify-out/GRAPH_REPORT.md for god nodes and community structure
- If graphify-out/wiki/index.md exists, navigate it instead of reading raw files
- For cross-module "how does X relate to Y" questions, prefer
graphify query "<question>",graphify path "<A>" "<B>", orgraphify explain "<concept>"over grep — these traverse the graph's EXTRACTED + INFERRED edges instead of scanning files - After modifying code files in this session, run
graphify update .to keep the graph current (AST-only, no API cost)
Agentic SDLC and Spec-Driven Development
Kiro-style Spec-Driven Development on an agentic SDLC
Project Context
Paths
- Steering:
.kiro/steering/ - Specs:
.kiro/specs/
Steering vs Specification
Steering (.kiro/steering/) - Guide AI with project-wide rules and context
Specs (.kiro/specs/) - Formalize development process for individual features
Active Specifications
- Check
.kiro/specs/for active specifications - Use
/kiro:spec-status [feature-name]to check progress
Development Guidelines
- Think in English, generate responses in English. All Markdown content written to project files (e.g., requirements.md, design.md, tasks.md, research.md, validation reports) MUST be written in the target language configured for this specification (see spec.json.language).
Minimal Workflow
- Phase 0 (optional):
/kiro:steering,/kiro:steering-custom - Phase 1 (Specification):
/kiro:spec-init "description"/kiro:spec-requirements {feature}/kiro:validate-gap {feature}(optional: for existing codebase)/kiro:spec-design {feature} [-y]/kiro:validate-design {feature}(optional: design review)/kiro:spec-tasks {feature} [-y]
- Phase 2 (Implementation):
/kiro:spec-impl {feature} [tasks]/kiro:validate-impl {feature}(optional: after implementation)
- Progress check:
/kiro:spec-status {feature}(use anytime)
Development Rules
- 3-phase approval workflow: Requirements → Design → Tasks → Implementation
- Human review required each phase; use
-yonly for intentional fast-track - Keep steering current and verify alignment with
/kiro:spec-status - Follow the user's instructions precisely, and within that scope act autonomously: gather the necessary context and complete the requested work end-to-end in this run, asking questions only when essential information is missing or the instructions are critically ambiguous.
Steering Configuration
- Load entire
.kiro/steering/as project memory - Default files:
product.md,tech.md,structure.md - Custom files are supported (managed via
/kiro:steering-custom)