Nw Sd PatternsSAFE
AI agents that guide you from idea to working code, with you in control at every step.
Overview
AI agents that guide you from idea to working code, with you in control at every step.
1a864ec81cdeOBSERVED · 2026-10-14What it tells the agent
The instruction file, verbatim from the audited commit — this is the text the model reads, and the surface the audit's instruction layer examines. Quoted here so you can judge it without cloning anything.
--- name: nw-sd-patterns description: Core distributed systems patterns - load balancing, caching, sharding, consistent hashing, message queues, rate limiting, CDN, Bloom filters, ID generation, replication, conflict resolution, CAP theorem user-invocable: false disable-model-invocation: true --- # Core Distributed Systems Patterns ## Load Balancing **Problem**: single server can't handle all traffic. **Approaches**: Round Robin (simple, ignores load) | Weighted Round Robin (accounts for capacity) | Least Connections (fewest active) | IP Hash (session affinity) | Layer 4/transport (IP/port, fast) | Layer 7/application (HTTP-aware, smarter) **Placement**: client-to-web | web-to-app | app-to-database **Trade-offs**: LB itself is SPOF -- use active-passive pair | session affinity complicates horizontal scaling -- prefer stateless servers | health checks critical ## Caching **Problem**: repeated DB reads are slow. **Strategies**: Cache-aside/lazy loading (app checks cache, fills on miss -- most common) | Write-through (write cache+DB simultaneously) | Write-behind (cache only, async to DB) | Read-through (cache fronts DB transparently) **Cache-aside pattern**: Read: `cache.get(key) -> hit? return : db.read -> cache.set -> return` | Write: `db.write -> cache.delete(key)` **Eviction**: LRU (most common) | LFU (skewed access) | TTL (time-based) **Problems**: thundering herd (many misses simultaneously -- use locking/coalescing) | cache penetration (non-existent keys -- Bloom filter or cache null) | cache avalanche (mass expiration -- jittered TTLs) | size cache based on working set, not total data ## Database Replication **Master-Slave**: all writes to master, reads to replicas | replication lag = eventual consistency | master fails: promote replica **Multi-Master**: writes to any node, conflict resolution required | better write availability, much more complex | suitable for multi-region **Trade-offs**: sync replication = consistency but higher write latency | async = lower latency but data loss risk on failure ## Database Sharding **Problem**: single DB can't handle write volume or data size. **Strategies**: Hash-based (hash(key) % N -- even but resharding painful) | Range-based (ranges, can have hotspots) | Directory-based (lookup table, flexible but SPOF) **Partition key**: must distribute data AND queries evenly | must be in most queries | common: user_id, tenant_id, region **Challenges**: resharding (consistent hashing helps) | celebrity/hotspot problem | cross-shard joins (expensive -- denormalize) | referential integrity (enforce in app) | schema changes across all shards ## Consistent Hashing **Problem**: traditional hash(key) % N remaps almost all keys when N changes. **How**: hash output space as ring (0 to 2^32-1) | servers at positions on ring | keys walk clockwise to first server | adding/removing server affects only adjacent keys **Virtual nodes**: each physical server gets 100-200 positions | ensures even distribution | handles heterogeneous capacities **Used in**: DynamoDB, Cassandra, Discord, Akamai CDN ## Message Queues **Problem**: tight coupling; spikes overwhelm downstream. **Properties**: decoupling | buffering (absorbs spikes) | async processing | guaranteed delivery **Patterns**: Point-to-point (one consumer per message) | Pub/Sub (all subscribers get message) | Dead letter queue (failed messages for debugging) **When**: email/notification sending | image/video processing | analytics ingestion | cross-service communication | any op where user doesn't need immediate result **Technologies**: Kafka (high throughput, log-based, event streaming) | RabbitMQ (flexible routing, task queues) | SQS (managed, AWS) | Redis Streams (lightweight) ## Rate Limiting **Problem**: protect services from abuse and cascading overload. | Algorithm | Mechanism | Pros | Cons | |-----------|-----------|------|------| | Token Bucket | tokens refill at fixed rate | allows bursts, simple | memory per user | | Leaking Bucket | queue with fixed processing rate | smooth output | no burst flexibility | | Fixed Window | count per time window | simple | burst at edges | | Sliding Window Log | track each request timestamp | precise | memory-intensive | | Sliding Window Counter | hybrid fixed + weighted | good balance | approximate | Token Bucket is industry standard (AWS, Stripe, GitHub). Implementation: API gateway or per-service | Redis counters with TTL | return 429 with Retry-After and X-RateLimit headers ## CDN **Problem**: static content from origin adds latency for distant users. **How**: assets cached at edge servers worldwide | DNS routes to nearest edge | cache miss fetches from origin **Push vs Pull**: Push (upload to CDN, infrequent changes) | Pull (CDN fetches on first request, simpler) **Invalidation**: URL versioning (preferred) | CDN API purge | TTL expiration ## Bloom Filters **Problem**: quickly check "is X in set?" without storing full set. **How**: bit array + k hash functions | insert sets k bits | query checks k bits | false positives possible, false negatives impossible **Used for**: cache penetration prevention | duplicate URL detection (crawlers) | spam filtering **Config**: 10 bits per element ~ 1% false positive rate | cannot delete (use Counting Bloom Filter) ## Unique ID Generation | Approach | Sortable | Size | Coordination | Throughput | |----------|----------|------|-------------|------------| | UUID v4 | No | 128b | None | Unlimited | | DB auto-inc | Yes | 64b | High | Limited | | Ticket server | Yes | 64b | Medium | Limited | | Snowflake | Yes | 64b | Minimal | Very high | **Snowflake**: `[1 unused | 41 timestamp | 5 datacenter | 5 machine | 12 sequence]` -- ~4M IDs/sec/DC | clock sync via NTP is Achilles heel ## Fan-out Strategies **Fan-out on write (push)**: post immediately written to all followers' feeds | read is instant | expensive for celebrities **Fan-out on read (pull)**: feed computed at read time | write is fa
Trust audit
SAFEgrade B · trust 89/100 Nothing in the source contradicts what it says it does. Grade A is reserved for packages that have also passed the behavioural sandbox.
| Layer | What it checks | Result |
|---|---|---|
| L0 | Provenance & inventory | PASS |
| L1 | Static analysis of the code | NA |
| L2 | Instruction surface (what it tells the agent) | PASS |
| L3 | Class-specific surface | PASS |
| L4 | Behavioural (sandbox) | SKIPPED |
What the source does
- Filesystem
- none-observed
- Network
- none-observed
- Shell
- none-observed
- Dependencies
- pinned
- Secrets in source
- none-found
Findings (0)
No findings outside the package's declared scope.
Gates applied: no_behavioural_pass.
1a864ec81cdefull audit observations/trust-audit/skill/nwave-ai__nw-sd-patterns.json · Report an issue / request a re-scanAudit history
Every audit this skill has had.
| Date | Source | Verdict | Grade | Score | Change |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-10-14 | 1a864ec81cde | SAFE | B | 89 | first audit |
Questions
What does the Nw Sd Patterns skill do?
AI agents that guide you from idea to working code, with you in control at every step.
Is Nw Sd Patterns safe to install?
The audit found nothing in the source that contradicts what it says it does, and graded it B (89/100). Grade A is held back for packages that have also passed a sandboxed behavioural run, which is why a clean skill reads B.
What can Nw Sd Patterns access on my machine?
The audit observed no filesystem, network or shell use at all in its source.
How current is this page?
The grade is for one exact copy of the source (1a864ec81cde), read on 2026-10-14. The repository is watched, and a new audit runs when it changes — this is the first audit.