setup-docker-servers-for-ab-tests

name

setup-docker-servers-for-ab-tests

description

Set up shaka-perf twin-servers — the Docker A/B testing infrastructure that runs your app twice (control vs experiment) so visreg/perf can compare two branches. Use this skill whenever the user wants to set up, configure, or debug twin-servers, "dockerize" their app for shaka-perf, write the twin-servers Dockerfile/Procfile/docker-compose, fill in the `twinServers` config, or get `shaka-perf servers` building and running — even if they just say "set up twin servers", "get the A/B servers running", or "make my app run under shaka-perf for perf testing".

setup-docker-servers-for-ab-tests

Twin-servers runs two production-mode copies of one app side by side — control (the baseline branch) and experiment (your branch) — so shaka-perf compare can diff them for visual and performance regressions. This skill sets up the Docker infrastructure that makes that happen in the current project.

The whole point is an apples-to-apples comparison: control and experiment must be identical in every way except the application code under test — same base image, dependencies, services, environment, data. Any incidental drift (a service only one side has, an env var that differs, a slower disk path) surfaces later as a phantom regression that's brutal to trace. Keep asking: are these two sides truly identical?

You produce, under a twin-servers/ directory in the project:

File	Purpose
twin-servers/Dockerfile	Production-mode image (non-root user, embedded services, no CMD)
twin-servers/Dockerfile.dockerignore	Keeps the build context tight and stable
twin-servers/Procfile	Tells Overmind which server processes to run per side
twin-servers/docker-compose.yml	Only if needed — the bundled default works for most projects

…plus a few small TWIN_SERVERS-gated guards in the app itself. The twinServers: slice in abtests.config.ts is already there — shaka-perf init writes it pre-filled, so you review and adjust it (Phase 1) rather than create it.

How the pieces run together

• shaka-perf servers build builds one Docker image per side. It auto-passes UID, GID, and NON_ROOT_USER build args from the host user, plus anything in dockerBuildArgs. If the control checkout is missing it offers to git clone it for you.
• shaka-perf servers start-containers brings the containers up with command: sleep infinity (they idle — no server yet), then runs your setupCommands in both containers in parallel.
• shaka-perf servers start-servers runs Overmind against the Procfile, which actually launches the app processes (puma, workers, SSR, …) inside the already-running containers.
• shaka-perf servers with no subcommand ties it together: rebuild if needed → start containers → interactive menu.

Default to doing everything in the image. The Dockerfile should install dependencies, build the app, install backing services, and run migrations + seed the database at build time so a built image is fully self-contained. The container then just runs. setupCommands and a multi-service docker-compose are escape hatches for the rare bits that genuinely can't be baked in — reach for them only with good reason (Phase 2 and Phase 6 explain when). So: the Dockerfile builds and seeds the world; the Procfile starts the app; setupCommands cover only what can't be baked into the image.

Reference docs — load as needed

Detail too bulky for the main flow — read the relevant one when you hit that phase.

File	Read it when…
references/writing-the-dockerfile.md	Writing or fixing twin-servers/Dockerfile — full annotated examples (minimal + a real multi-service app), the non-root-user recipe, embedding Postgres/Redis/Memcached, and every rule with its reasoning
references/compose-and-procfile.md	Writing the Procfile, or deciding whether you need a custom docker-compose.yml and how to pair services per side
references/troubleshooting.md	The build/verify loop fails, or before you call it done — failure→fix table and the A/B-diligence checklist

---

Phase 0 — Survey the project (read-only)

Do not write anything yet. First understand what you're dockerizing, because the Dockerfile and config flow directly from it. Investigate:

• Stack & server command — Rails/puma? Node/Next? Django? How does the app normally boot in production, on what port? Check Procfile, Procfile.dev, config/puma.rb, package.json scripts, bin/ scripts.
• Existing production Dockerfile — is there one to adapt? Adapting an existing, working production image is far safer than writing from scratch. Look in the repo root, .docker/, config/, CI files.
• Backing services — Postgres? MySQL? Redis? Memcached? Elasticsearch? Read config/database.yml, docker-compose*.yml, Gemfile/package.json, .env.example, and the project's dev-setup docs (README, bin/setup). Every service the app needs at runtime must exist for both sides.
• Background processes — Sidekiq/queues, an SSR/node renderer, asset watchers. Each becomes a Procfile line per side.
• Runtime versions — .ruby-version, .node-version, package.json#engines. You will pass these as build args; never edit these project files to suit Docker (see the rule in references/writing-the-dockerfile.md).
• Existing setup scripts — bin/setup, db:prepare, db:seed, migration tasks. Reuse these (run them in the Dockerfile build, so the prepared/seeded state is baked into the image) rather than reinventing them. Keep it DRY.

Gate — write a short Project Profile before moving on. A few lines: stack, server start command + port, list of services and how each will be provided (embedded in the image vs. a compose service), background processes, runtime versions, and which existing setup scripts you'll reuse. If you can't fill this in, you haven't surveyed enough — keep digging. This profile is the spec for everything that follows.

---

Phase 1 — Fill in the twinServers config

shaka-perf init already wrote a twinServers: block in abtests.config.ts, pre-filled with sensible defaults: controlDir derives from the current dir name + -control, and the CONTROL_PORT / EXPERIMENT_PORT constants are reused so the host-port mapping, the URLs visreg/perf hit, and the Procfile's readiness check can't drift. Review and adjust to the project — the block below is the shape to aim for:

twinServers: {
  // This checkout is the experiment side.
  experimentDir: process.cwd(),
  // Where the baseline branch lives — defaults to a sibling dir named after
  // this one with `-control` appended. `servers build` offers to clone it here
  // if it doesn't exist yet, using this repo's git remote.
  controlDir: `../${path.basename(process.cwd())}-control`,
  // Docker build context. The SAME relative offset is applied under
  // experimentDir and controlDir when building each side's image.
  dockerBuildDir: '.',
  dockerfile: 'twin-servers/Dockerfile',
  procfile: 'twin-servers/Procfile',
  // Pass runtime versions etc. here — do NOT edit the project's version files.
  dockerBuildArgs: {
    // NODE_VERSION: '20.11.0',
  },
  ports: { control: CONTROL_PORT, experiment: EXPERIMENT_PORT },
  // LAST RESORT — most apps need none. Do all setup (install, build, migrate,
  // seed) in the Dockerfile. setupCommands run in BOTH containers at start;
  // use them only for what can't be baked into an image — chiefly starting an
  // embedded service daemon.
  // setupCommands: [
  //   { command: 'redis-server --daemonize yes', description: 'Starting Redis' },
  // ],
},

Notes that save you debugging later:

• Image names and host volume dirs are auto-derived from a slug of the project path — you don't (and can't) set them. Two checkouts of the same repo therefore never collide.
• composeFile is optional. Omit it and the bundled default compose is used. Only add it in Phase 6 if you genuinely need extra services.
• controlDir/experimentDir/dockerBuildDir are resolved relative to the project dir; ~ is expanded.

---

Phase 2 — Write the production Dockerfile

Create twin-servers/Dockerfile. Read references/writing-the-dockerfile.md first — it has annotated end-to-end examples and the full rationale. The essentials, with the why:

• Production-mode, but local. Run as close to real production as possible (same build, asset precompile, env), except prod-only externals (real payment APIs, prod DB) are stubbed and disabled via a TWIN_SERVERS=true env var the app checks (Phase 4). Differences from prod are fine; differences between the two sides are not.
• Non-root user with host-matching UID/GID. Containers bind-mount a host directory, so the in-container user must match the host user or you get permission errors. Declare ARG NON_ROOT_USER, ARG UID, ARG GID (re-declared after each FROM) — servers build fills them from the host automatically.
• Put everything under that user's home (/home/$NON_ROOT_USER/app, …/bundle, …/node), not /app or /usr/local/..., to avoid bind-mount permission conflicts.
• COPY --chown=$NON_ROOT_USER:$NON_ROOT_USER for every copy so the user owns its files.
• Bake config into ENV, not docker-compose. SECRET_KEY_BASE, placeholder API keys, TWIN_SERVERS=true, DB config — all ENV in the Dockerfile so the image is self-contained and identical on both sides. Reserve compose environment: strictly for the few values that must differ between sides (e.g. PERF_EXPERIMENT).
• Embed backing services in the image (install Postgres/Redis/Memcached in the Dockerfile) rather than as separate compose services. Simpler, fully isolated per side, no cross-container networking. See references/writing-the-dockerfile.md.
• Do all setup at build time — including migrations and seeding. Run db:prepare/db:seed in a RUN so the data is baked into the image, identical on both sides. (A running daemon is the one thing you can't bake in — hence the narrow setupCommands exception.)
• Pass runtime versions as build args, e.g. ENV NODE_VERSION=... driven by dockerBuildArgs. Don't modify .node-version/.ruby-version/engines.

---

Phase 3 — Write the dockerignore

Create twin-servers/Dockerfile.dockerignore. Docker looks for <dockerfile-path>.dockerignore before the context-root .dockerignore, so naming it after the Dockerfile keeps twin-servers' ignore rules separate from any existing one. Paths are relative to the build context (dockerBuildDir), not to twin-servers/.

Always include Shaka Perf's host-side result directories. Use both forms so the rules work whether the build context is the project root or a monorepo root containing the project:

compare-bisect-results*/
**/compare-bisect-results*/
compare-results*/
**/compare-results*/

Two reasons it matters:

1. A tight context builds faster — don't ship node_modules, build artifacts, logs, tmp, .git, or secrets that are generated/installed inside the image.
2. Stable context = stable rebuild signal. twin-servers watches the files Docker actually ingests to decide whether a rebuild is needed. If host-only files (editor saves, host test runs, files the container never reads) are in the context, every such edit needlessly flips the rebuild signal. Ignore anything the container doesn't consume.

---

Phase 4 — Add TWIN_SERVERS guards in the app

The image sets TWIN_SERVERS=true. Make the smallest possible app changes so production mode runs locally over HTTP without firing real-world side effects. Typical guards (adapt to the stack):

• Disable forced SSL — production usually forces HTTPS; twin-servers is local HTTP. e.g. config.force_ssl = ENV['TWIN_SERVERS'] != 'true'.
• Guard external side effects during seeding/boot — emails, webhooks, third-party API calls. Extend existing dev/test guards: return if Rails.env.development? || ENV['TWIN_SERVERS'] == 'true'.
• Make the DB username configurable if production hardcodes one that isn't the container user: username: <%= ENV.fetch('DB_USERNAME', 'original') %>, then ENV DB_USERNAME=$NON_ROOT_USER in the Dockerfile.

Keep these changes minimal and confined — the goal is to dockerize without rewriting the app. Anything you can express as an ENV in the Dockerfile, prefer that over touching app code.

---

Phase 5 — Write the Procfile

Create twin-servers/Procfile. One process line per app process per side, plus a readiness notifier per side. See references/compose-and-procfile.md for SSR/worker variants. Minimal Rails example:

control-rails: yarn shaka-perf servers run-overmind-command control "bundle exec puma -C config/puma.rb -b tcp://0.0.0.0:3000"
experiment-rails: yarn shaka-perf servers run-overmind-command experiment "bundle exec puma -C config/puma.rb -b tcp://0.0.0.0:3000"
notify-control-server-started: yarn shaka-perf servers notify-server-started control
notify-experiment-server-started: yarn shaka-perf servers notify-server-started experiment

• run-overmind-command <side> "<cmd>" runs the command inside that side's container with PID tracking, so Overmind can stop/restart it cleanly. The command binds to 0.0.0.0:3000 inside the container; the host port mapping comes from ports.
• notify-server-started <side> waits for the side's port (from ports), announces it, then idles to keep Overmind happy. Run background workers (Sidekiq, SSR) as their own lines per side — never share a worker between sides.

---

Phase 6 — Custom docker-compose (only if you actually need it)

The bundled default compose handles the common case (two app containers, bind-mount volumes, the PERF_EXPERIMENT flag) — omit composeFile and skip this phase if you embedded all services in the image, which is the recommended path.

Only write a custom compose when a service genuinely can't be embedded (e.g. it already has a maintained Docker image you want to reuse, like Elasticsearch). If so, run yarn shaka-perf servers customize-docker-compose to get an editable copy, and follow the hard rule in references/compose-and-procfile.md: every backing service gets its own -control and -experiment instance — the two sides must never share one. Keep it minimal; push everything you can back into the Dockerfile.

---

Phase 7 — Build and verify (the loop that actually matters)

A setup that looks right but doesn't boot is worth nothing — drive it until both servers actually serve. Budget most of your effort here.

1. Build. yarn shaka-perf servers build (add -v for verbose, --no-cache if you suspect a stale layer). If control isn't checked out, accept the clone prompt.
2. Start containers. yarn shaka-perf servers start-containers. This runs any setupCommands in both sides — usually just starting embedded daemons, since install/build/migrate/seed already happened in the image. A db/seed failure should surface during build, not here.
3. Start servers. yarn shaka-perf servers start-servers. This runs Overmind in the foreground and does not return — the notifier processes idle to keep it alive. So start it in the background (or a separate terminal) and keep its log, otherwise you'll hang waiting on it. Don't use the interactive no-subcommand yarn shaka-perf servers here — its menu needs a human.
4. Verify both sides respond — the ground truth. Once the logs show both servers announced, hit each port and confirm a real page, not a 5xx:

   curl -fsS -o /dev/null -w "%{http_code}\n" http://localhost:$CONTROL_PORT
   curl -fsS -o /dev/null -w "%{http_code}\n" http://localhost:$EXPERIMENT_PORT
   

   Don't trust "server started" logs alone — an app can boot and still 500 on every request.
5. When something fails, debug inside the container with yarn shaka-perf servers run-cmd <side> bash (or run a one-off command). Read references/troubleshooting.md for the common failure→fix table (permission errors, missing services, asset/precompile failures, port conflicts, db setup). Fix the Dockerfile / config / guards, then re-run from the right step. Iterate until both sides return success.

Gate: both curls return a 2xx/3xx (a real rendered page) before you proceed. If a side only works after a manual fix, fold that fix into the Dockerfile (preferred) — or, if it's an unavoidable runtime step, a minimal setupCommands entry — so a clean rebuild reproduces it. A setup that only works by hand is not done.

---

Phase 8 — A/B diligence review (final gate)

Before declaring success, walk the diligence checklist in references/troubleshooting.md and confirm every box — it's the guard against phantom regressions (shared state, env drift, non-deterministic seeds, a leftover CMD, project files touched outside scope).

Then summarize for the user: the files you created, services embedded vs. composed, the build/verify result (with the HTTP codes you saw), any app guards you added, and any manual steps still required. Point them at shaka-perf compare as the next step now that both servers are up.