Momentum LMS - Comprehensive Architecture Evaluation

Document Version: 1.0 Evaluation Date: 2025-12-10 Current Status: MVP Phase ~80% Complete Evaluator: System Architecture Team

Executive Summary

This evaluation assesses the Momentum Learning Management Platform architecture against industry best practices, AWS Well-Architected Framework principles, scalability requirements, and long-term sustainability goals.

Overall Architecture Rating: 7.5/10

Key Findings:

  • Strengths: Well-designed serverless foundation, comprehensive AI integration, solid security posture, excellent infrastructure as code implementation
  • Concerns: Single environment pattern creates risk, observability gaps, cost optimization opportunities, architectural debt accumulating
  • Critical Risk: GraphQL to REST architectural mismatch between documentation and implementation

Priority Recommendations Summary

Priority Recommendation Business Impact Technical Effort Timeline
P0 Implement environment separation Risk Mitigation Medium 2-3 weeks
P0 Resolve GraphQL/REST documentation mismatch Clarity & Future Planning Low 1 week
P1 Enhance observability and monitoring Operational Excellence Medium 2-3 weeks
P1 Implement cost tracking and optimization Cost Control Low-Medium 1-2 weeks
P2 Add caching layer utilization Performance & Cost Medium 2-3 weeks
P2 Implement disaster recovery strategy Business Continuity High 4-6 weeks
P3 Refactor Lambda VPC configuration Performance & Cost Medium 2-3 weeks

Table of Contents

  1. Architecture Strengths
  2. Potential Concerns & Risks
  3. Scalability Assessment
  4. Cost Optimization Opportunities
  5. Security Posture
  6. Operational Excellence
  7. Reliability & Resilience
  8. AWS Well-Architected Framework Alignment
  9. Prioritized Action Plan
  10. Conclusion

1. Architecture Strengths

1.1 Serverless-First Design ✅

Finding: The architecture leverages AWS serverless services effectively, minimizing operational overhead while maintaining flexibility.

Evidence:

  • Lambda functions for all API endpoints with proper separation of concerns
  • Aurora Serverless v2 with Data API for HTTP-based database access (no VPC complexity for most functions)
  • Step Functions Express Workflows for AI orchestration (90% cost savings vs. standard workflows)
  • S3 with Intelligent-Tiering for cost-optimized storage
  • API Gateway with usage plans for rate limiting and throttling

Benefits:

  • Pay-per-use cost model reduces waste
  • Auto-scaling without capacity planning
  • Minimal infrastructure management
  • Rapid deployment and iteration

Best Practice Alignment: ✅ Excellent - Follows AWS serverless best practices

1.2 Comprehensive AI Integration ✅

Finding: The AI content generation pipeline is well-architected with Amazon Bedrock, Step Functions, and third-party video services.

Evidence:

  • Step Functions state machine with 18+ steps orchestrating AI workflow
  • Separation of concerns: validation → outline generation → lesson generation → video → thumbnail → save
  • Error handling and retry logic at each step
  • Cost tracking via job metadata
  • Integration with Amazon Bedrock (Claude models) for text generation
  • HeyGen integration for video generation with polling mechanism
  • Bedrock Stability AI for thumbnail generation

Architecture Pattern:

Admin Input → Step Functions Orchestration
  ├─> Validate Input (Lambda)
  ├─> Generate Outline (Bedrock via Lambda)
  ├─> Generate Lesson Prompts (Bedrock via Lambda)
  ├─> Trigger Video Generation (HeyGen via Lambda)
  │   └─> Poll Video Status (Wait + Lambda loop)
  ├─> Generate Thumbnail (Bedrock Stability AI via Lambda)
  ├─> Save Course (Lambda → Aurora)
  └─> Notify Admin (SNS)

Strengths:

  • Asynchronous processing prevents timeout issues
  • Each step is independently retryable
  • Clear separation between text, video, and thumbnail generation
  • Cost tracking at job level
  • Admin can review before publishing

Best Practice Alignment: ✅ Excellent - Well-designed event-driven architecture

1.3 Infrastructure as Code (Terraform) ✅

Finding: Comprehensive Terraform configuration covering all AWS resources with proper state management.

Evidence:

  • 21 Terraform files managing entire infrastructure
  • Remote state backend in S3 with DynamoDB locking
  • Proper resource tagging (Project, Environment, ManagedBy, Component)
  • Lifecycle policies and ignore_changes for production stability
  • Modular structure with separate files per service
  • Environment-specific configurations (prod vs. dev retention, deletion protection)

Examples of Excellence:

# Proper deletion protection for production
deletion_protection = var.environment == "prod"

# Environment-based log retention
retention_in_days = var.environment == "prod" ? 30 : 7

# Lifecycle management for code updates
lifecycle {
  ignore_changes = [source_code_hash, filename]
}

Best Practice Alignment: ✅ Excellent - Production-grade IaC implementation

1.4 Security Implementation ✅

Finding: Multi-layered security approach with Cognito, IAM, KMS, and Secrets Manager.

Evidence:

  • AWS Cognito User Pools for authentication with MFA support
  • Social login integration (Google, Facebook, Apple)
  • JWT-based API authorization with role-based access control (ADMIN, PREMIUM, FREE)
  • API Gateway with API key requirement + Cognito authorizer
  • KMS encryption for Aurora database at rest
  • Secrets Manager for database credentials, API keys (HeyGen, OAuth)
  • Security groups with least privilege (Lambda → Aurora 5432 only)
  • S3 bucket public access blocked by default
  • HTTPS-only communication via CloudFront/API Gateway

IAM Best Practices:

  • Separate IAM roles per Lambda function purpose
  • Least privilege permissions
  • Resource-based policies for cross-service access
  • Enhanced monitoring roles for RDS

Best Practice Alignment: ✅ Excellent - Comprehensive security posture

1.5 Database Design ✅

Finding: Well-normalized PostgreSQL schema with proper indexes, constraints, and foreign keys.

Evidence from schema:

-- Proper constraints and validation
CONSTRAINT valid_duration CHECK (duration_days IN (7, 14, 21))
CONSTRAINT valid_status CHECK (status IN ('DRAFT', 'PUBLISHED', 'ARCHIVED'))
CONSTRAINT unique_user_course UNIQUE (user_id, course_id)

-- Strategic indexes for performance
CREATE INDEX idx_courses_category ON courses(category_id);
CREATE INDEX idx_courses_status ON courses(status);
CREATE INDEX idx_courses_created_at ON courses(created_at DESC);

-- Full-text search capability
CREATE INDEX idx_courses_search ON courses USING GIN (
  to_tsvector('english', title || ' ' || description)
);

-- Automatic timestamp triggers
CREATE TRIGGER update_courses_updated_at
  BEFORE UPDATE ON courses
  FOR EACH ROW
  EXECUTE FUNCTION update_updated_at_column();

Strengths:

  • Proper normalization (users, categories, courses, lessons, enrollments, progress, payments)
  • JSONB columns for flexible metadata without schema changes
  • Foreign key constraints with CASCADE for data integrity
  • Indexes optimized for query patterns
  • Full-text search for course discovery
  • Automatic timestamp management

8 migrations implemented:

  1. Initial schema
  2. Email verification field
  3. Seed data (6 categories)
  4. Badges and achievements system
  5. AI generation job tracking
  6. Analytics tables
  7. User demographics
  8. PDF reference documents

Best Practice Alignment: ✅ Excellent - Production-ready database design

1.6 Frontend Architecture ✅

Finding: Modern Next.js 14 application with proper structure and 26+ pages implemented.

Evidence:

  • App Router pattern with TypeScript
  • Proper page organization (admin, courses, auth, dashboard, profile)
  • API client abstraction layer
  • Component separation and reusability
  • TailwindCSS for consistent styling
  • React Quill for rich text editing
  • Recharts for analytics visualization

Pages Inventory (26 pages):

  • Admin: Dashboard, Courses (list/edit/new), Lessons (list/edit/new), Users (list/edit), Analytics, Settings, AI Generation
  • Public: Homepage, Course catalog, Course detail, Lesson detail
  • Auth: Sign in, Sign up, Callback
  • User: Dashboard, Profile, Analytics
  • Enrollment: Checkout, Success

Best Practice Alignment: ✅ Good - Well-structured Next.js application

2. Potential Concerns & Risks

2.1 CRITICAL: GraphQL vs. REST Architectural Mismatch ⚠️

Risk Level: HIGH (Documentation vs. Implementation Mismatch) Impact: Strategic Planning, Future Development, Team Confusion Probability: Already Present

Finding: Documentation (technical-architecture.md) describes a GraphQL/AppSync architecture, but implementation uses REST API Gateway.

Evidence:

Documentation Claims (technical-architecture.md):

### API Layer
- **AWS AppSync (GraphQL)**
  - Managed GraphQL API
  - Real-time subscriptions (for live progress updates)
  - Flexible querying (clients request only needed data)

Actual Implementation:

# infrastructure/terraform/api-gateway.tf
resource "aws_api_gateway_rest_api" "main" {
  name = "${var.project_name}-api-${var.environment}"
  description = "REST API for ${var.project_name} backend services"
}

Consequences:

  1. Developer Confusion: New team members will expect GraphQL but find REST
  2. Technical Debt: Future GraphQL migration would require significant refactoring
  3. Feature Limitations: Missing real-time subscriptions that GraphQL/AppSync provides
  4. Documentation Trust: Undermines confidence in technical documentation

Recommendation:

Priority: P0 - Immediate
Action: Choose one of three paths:

Option 1: Update Documentation to Match Reality (Recommended - 1 week)
  - Rewrite technical-architecture.md to reflect REST implementation
  - Document why REST was chosen over GraphQL
  - Create ADR documenting the decision
  - Remove GraphQL schema examples from docs

Option 2: Migrate to GraphQL (Not Recommended - 8-12 weeks)
  - Implement AWS AppSync
  - Migrate all REST endpoints to GraphQL resolvers
  - Implement subscriptions for real-time features
  - Update frontend to use GraphQL client
  - HIGH RISK: Major refactoring during MVP phase

Option 3: Hybrid Approach (Partial - 3-4 weeks)
  - Keep REST for current features
  - Add AppSync for real-time features only (progress updates, notifications)
  - Document the hybrid approach clearly
  - RISK: Adds complexity with two API paradigms

Rationale for Option 1:

  • REST API is working well and meets current requirements
  • Simpler caching strategy (CloudFront, API Gateway cache)
  • Lower learning curve for team
  • Easier to debug and monitor
  • GraphQL can be added later if real-time features become critical
  • Avoids refactoring risk during MVP

Create ADR:

# ADR-003: REST over GraphQL for MVP

## Status
Accepted

## Context
Technical documentation described GraphQL/AppSync, but implementation uses REST API Gateway.

## Decision
Continue with REST API Gateway for MVP. GraphQL/AppSync deferred to post-MVP phase if real-time features are required.

## Consequences
Positive:
- Simpler caching and CDN integration
- Lower operational complexity
- Faster development velocity
- Easier debugging and monitoring
- Standard HTTP/REST tooling

Negative:
- No built-in real-time subscriptions
- Clients fetch more data than needed (overfetching)
- Multiple endpoints instead of single GraphQL endpoint
- Future migration to GraphQL requires refactoring

Mitigation:
- Implement polling for real-time-like features
- Optimize REST responses to minimize overfetching
- Document clear migration path to GraphQL if needed

2.2 Single Environment Architecture ⚠️

Risk Level: HIGH Impact: Production Stability, Testing Safety, Deployment Confidence Probability: High (every deployment affects production)

Finding: Current architecture merges dev and production into single environment (momentum.cloudnnj.com), violating industry best practices.

Evidence:

# From CLAUDE.md
Environment: Single environment → momentum.cloudnnj.com
Status: MVP Phase ~80% Complete

Problems:

  1. No Safe Testing Environment: Cannot test infrastructure changes without affecting production
  2. Deployment Risk: Every deployment is to production
  3. Data Contamination: Test data mixed with real user data
  4. Debugging Difficulty: Cannot reproduce production issues in isolated environment
  5. Compliance Risk: Violates SOC 2, ISO 27001 requirements (if pursuing certifications)

Recommendation:

Priority: P0 - Critical for post-MVP
Timeline: 2-3 weeks
Effort: Medium

Implementation:
  1. Create separate AWS accounts using AWS Organizations:
     - Production account (momentum.cloudnnj.com)
     - Staging account (staging.momentum.cloudnnj.com)
     - Development account (dev.momentum.cloudnnj.com)

  2. Update Terraform for multi-environment:
     - Use Terraform workspaces or separate state files
     - Environment-specific tfvars files
     - Conditional resource creation based on environment

  3. Database strategy:
     - Production: Aurora Serverless v2 (current configuration)
     - Staging: Aurora Serverless v2 (smaller min/max ACU)
     - Dev: Aurora Serverless v2 (0.5-2 ACU) or PostgreSQL RDS single instance

  4. Cost optimization for non-prod:
     - Scheduled auto-shutdown for dev environment (nights/weekends)
     - Smaller instance sizes
     - Shorter log retention (7 days vs. 30 days)
     - No deletion protection

  5. Data management:
     - Automated daily snapshot from production → staging
     - Anonymized/masked PII in staging/dev
     - Separate Cognito User Pools per environment

Cost Impact:

Current (Single Environment): ~$200-300/month
After Separation:
  - Production: ~$200-300/month (same)
  - Staging: ~$100-150/month (smaller scale)
  - Dev: ~$50-80/month (auto-shutdown nights/weekends)
  Total: ~$350-530/month (+75% increase)

Justification: Risk mitigation and deployment confidence worth the cost

Migration Path:

  1. Week 1: Create staging environment, deploy current state
  2. Week 2: Test deployment pipeline to staging
  3. Week 3: Create dev environment, document workflow
  4. Ongoing: Enforce “staging-first” deployment policy

2.3 ElastiCache Provisioned but Unused ⚠️

Risk Level: MEDIUM Impact: Cost Waste, Missed Performance Opportunity Probability: Currently occurring

Finding: ElastiCache Serverless is provisioned in Terraform but not utilized by application code.

Evidence:

# From technical-roadmap.md
**Caching**: ElastiCache Serverless | Provisioned but unused |
**Defer caching** until traffic justifies it (10K+ requests/hour).
Database is fast enough for MVP.

Cost Impact:

  • ElastiCache Serverless: ~$15-60/month (idle)
  • NAT Gateway for Lambda→ElastiCache: ~$32/month
  • Total waste: ~$47-92/month for unused resource

Recommendation:

Priority: P1 - Post-MVP
Options:

Option 1: Remove ElastiCache (Recommended for MVP)
  Timeline: 1 day
  Savings: ~$50-90/month
  Action:
    - Comment out or delete ElastiCache resources in Terraform
    - Apply changes
    - Re-enable when traffic reaches 10K+ requests/hour

Option 2: Implement Caching Layer (Better for scaling)
  Timeline: 2-3 weeks
  Savings: Reduces Aurora costs, improves performance
  Action:
    - Implement caching wrapper around CourseRepository
    - Cache course list, individual courses (1-5 min TTL)
    - Cache categories (24 hour TTL)
    - Cache user progress summaries (1 min TTL)
    - Add cache invalidation on updates

  Example implementation:
    class CachedCourseService {
      async getCourse(id: string) {
        const cached = await redis.get(`course:${id}`);
        if (cached) return JSON.parse(cached);

        const course = await db.getCourse(id);
        await redis.setex(`course:${id}`, 300, JSON.stringify(course));
        return course;
      }
    }

Defer to Post-MVP: Current recommendation is sound. Database performance is adequate for MVP scale. Implement caching when:

  • API response time P95 > 500ms
  • Database ACU consistently > 4
  • Cost optimization becomes priority
  • Traffic > 10K requests/hour

2.4 Lambda VPC Configuration Overhead ⚠️

Risk Level: MEDIUM Impact: Cost, Performance (Cold Starts), Complexity Probability: Currently affecting all VPC-attached Lambdas

Finding: Most Lambda functions are attached to VPC for Aurora access, incurring cold start penalties and NAT Gateway costs.

Evidence:

# All Lambdas have VPC config for database access
vpc_config {
  subnet_ids         = aws_subnet.private[*].id
  security_group_ids = [aws_security_group.lambda.id]
}

Problems:

  1. Cold Start Penalty: 5-10 second ENI attachment delay
  2. NAT Gateway Costs: $32/month + $0.045/GB for outbound traffic
  3. IP Address Exhaustion: VPC needs large CIDR blocks for many concurrent Lambdas
  4. Complexity: Security groups, subnet management, routing tables

Good News: Aurora Serverless v2 supports Data API which allows HTTP-based database access without VPC!

Evidence from database.tf:

# Enable Data API for HTTP-based access from Lambda
enable_http_endpoint = true

Recommendation:

Priority: P2 - Post-MVP optimization
Timeline: 2-3 weeks
Effort: Medium

Action Plan:
  1. Audit Lambda functions:
     - Identify which Lambdas ONLY need database access
     - Identify which Lambdas need other VPC resources

  2. Migrate database-only Lambdas to Data API:
     - Remove VPC configuration
     - Replace pg client with RDS Data Service client
     - Test performance (Data API has ~50-100ms overhead)

  3. Keep VPC for:
     - Lambdas that need ElastiCache access
     - Lambdas that call other VPC resources

  Example migration:
    // Before (VPC required)
    const { Client } = require('pg');
    const client = new Client({ host: 'aurora-endpoint' });

    // After (No VPC needed)
    const { RDSDataClient, ExecuteStatementCommand } = require('@aws-sdk/client-rds-data');
    const client = new RDSDataClient({});

Cost Savings:
  - Remove NAT Gateway if no VPC Lambdas: $32/month
  - Faster cold starts: 5-10 seconds saved
  - Simpler infrastructure: Fewer resources to manage

Trade-offs:
  - Data API has ~50-100ms latency overhead vs. direct connection
  - No connection pooling benefits
  - Different SQL syntax for parameter binding

Decision: Defer until traffic justifies optimization

2.5 No Disaster Recovery Strategy ⚠️

Risk Level: HIGH (for production) Impact: Business Continuity, Data Loss Risk Probability: Low (but catastrophic if occurs)

Finding: No documented disaster recovery (DR) or backup restoration procedures.

Current Backup Status:

# Aurora backups enabled
backup_retention_period = var.environment == "prod" ? 30 : 7

# S3 versioning enabled
versioning_configuration {
  status = "Enabled"
}

Gaps:

  1. No RTO/RPO defined: Recovery Time Objective and Recovery Point Objective not documented
  2. No restoration testing: Backups exist but never tested
  3. No cross-region replication: Single region failure = complete outage
  4. No runbook: No documented recovery procedures
  5. No automation: Manual restoration process

Recommendation:

Priority: P2 - Before public launch
Timeline: 4-6 weeks
Effort: High

DR Strategy for MVP:

1. Define Objectives:
   RTO (Recovery Time Objective): 4 hours
   RPO (Recovery Point Objective): 15 minutes

2. Aurora Multi-AZ:
   - Already configured (implicit in Aurora Serverless v2)
   - Automatic failover within same region

3. Cross-Region Replication (Optional - Post-MVP):
   - Aurora Global Database for 1-second RPO
   - Read replica in us-west-2
   - Promote to primary if us-east-1 fails

4. Backup Testing:
   - Quarterly restoration drills
   - Automate with Lambda: restore backup → staging environment
   - Validate data integrity

5. Application Recovery:
   - Terraform state in S3 with versioning (already implemented ✅)
   - Document: Deploy from scratch in new region
   - Infrastructure deployment: 30-60 minutes
   - Data restoration from backup: 1-2 hours

6. Runbook Documentation:
   - Step-by-step restoration procedures
   - Contact information and escalation
   - Store in git and print to safe location

7. Point-in-Time Recovery Testing:
   - Test Aurora PITR every 6 months
   - Restore to specific timestamp
   - Validate with known data

Cost Impact:
  - Cross-region replica: +$200-300/month (defer to post-MVP)
  - Testing automation: One-time $0 (use existing Lambda)
  - Documentation: One-time effort, no recurring cost

Immediate Actions (P1):

  1. Document current backup retention settings ✅ (already in Terraform)
  2. Create restoration runbook (2-3 days)
  3. Test Aurora restoration to staging environment (1 day)
  4. Set up CloudWatch alarms for backup failures (1 day)

2.6 Observability Gaps ⚠️

Risk Level: MEDIUM Impact: Operational Visibility, Debugging Difficulty, Performance Blind Spots Probability: Currently affecting operations

Finding: Basic logging exists, but comprehensive observability is limited.

Current State:

# CloudWatch Logs enabled ✅
retention_in_days = var.environment == "prod" ? 30 : 7

# X-Ray tracing enabled ✅
tracing_config {
  mode = "Active"
}

# API Gateway logging ✅
access_log_settings {
  destination_arn = aws_cloudwatch_log_group.api_gateway.arn
}

Gaps:

  1. No Custom Metrics: Not tracking business metrics (enrollments, completions, AI generation costs)
  2. No Dashboards: No CloudWatch Dashboard for operational overview
  3. Limited Alarms: No proactive alerts for anomalies
  4. No Distributed Tracing Visualization: X-Ray enabled but not actively monitored
  5. No Error Aggregation: Errors logged but not aggregated or analyzed
  6. No Performance Insights Dashboard: Aurora Performance Insights enabled but not monitored
  7. No Cost Anomaly Detection: No alerts for unexpected cost spikes

Recommendation:

Priority: P1 - Essential for production
Timeline: 2-3 weeks
Effort: Medium

Phase 1: Core Monitoring (Week 1)
  1. CloudWatch Dashboard:
     - API Gateway: Request count, 4xx/5xx errors, latency P50/P95/P99
     - Lambda: Invocations, errors, duration, concurrent executions
     - Aurora: CPU, connections, query performance
     - Step Functions: Executions, failures, duration

  2. Critical Alarms:
     - API Gateway 5xx error rate > 1%
     - Lambda error rate > 0.5%
     - Aurora CPU > 80% for 5 minutes
     - Step Functions failure rate > 5%
     - Aurora storage < 10% free

  3. Cost Alarms:
     - Daily spend > $20 (unusual spike)
     - Monthly forecast > $500

Phase 2: Business Metrics (Week 2)
  1. Custom Metrics via CloudWatch PutMetricData:
     - Enrollment count (hourly)
     - Course completion rate (daily)
     - AI generation job success rate (per job)
     - AI generation cost (per job)
     - User sign-up count (daily)

  2. Example implementation:
     const cloudwatch = new CloudWatch();
     await cloudwatch.putMetricData({
       Namespace: 'Momentum/Business',
       MetricData: [{
         MetricName: 'CourseEnrollments',
         Value: 1,
         Unit: 'Count',
         Timestamp: new Date()
       }]
     });

Phase 3: Advanced Observability (Week 3)
  1. Structured Logging:
     - Standardize log format across all Lambdas
     - Include correlation IDs for request tracing
     - Add structured fields (userId, courseId, actionType)

  2. CloudWatch Insights Queries:
     - Top 10 slowest API endpoints
     - Error rate by endpoint
     - User journey analysis

  3. X-Ray Service Map:
     - Visualize request flow through services
     - Identify performance bottlenecks
     - Trace end-to-end latency

Cost Impact: ~$10-30/month for custom metrics and dashboards

Immediate Quick Wins (1-2 days):

  1. Create basic CloudWatch Dashboard (manual, no code)
  2. Set up critical alarms (Terraform + SNS topic)
  3. Document how to access X-Ray service map

2.7 Step Functions Cost Risk ⚠️

Risk Level: LOW-MEDIUM Impact: Cost Optimization, Budget Control Probability: Medium (as AI generation scales)

Finding: Step Functions Express Workflows used correctly, but no cost tracking per execution.

Current Implementation: ✅ Good choice

resource "aws_sfn_state_machine" "ai_course_generator" {
  type = "EXPRESS"  # 90% cheaper than standard
}

Cost Structure:

  • Express Workflows: $1.00 per 1 million requests + duration charges
  • Average workflow duration: ~5-10 minutes
  • Estimated cost per course generation: $0.001-0.005

Recommendation:

Priority: P2 - Monitor as usage scales
Action:
  1. Add cost tracking to generation jobs table:
     ALTER TABLE course_generation_jobs ADD COLUMN step_functions_cost DECIMAL(10,4);

  2. Calculate and store cost per execution:
     - Track workflow duration
     - Calculate cost based on AWS pricing
     - Store in job record

  3. Monthly cost reporting:
     SELECT
       DATE_TRUNC('month', created_at) as month,
       COUNT(*) as jobs,
       SUM(step_functions_cost) as total_cost,
       AVG(step_functions_cost) as avg_cost_per_job
     FROM course_generation_jobs
     GROUP BY month;

  4. Set budget alerts:
     - Monthly Step Functions spend > $50
     - Per-job cost > $0.01 (indicates inefficiency)

Optimization opportunities:
  - Parallel execution where possible (already implemented ✅)
  - Reduce wait times in polling loops (current: 60s → could be 30s)
  - Cache generation results to avoid re-generation

3. Scalability Assessment

3.1 Current Scale Targets

From Performance Targets (CLAUDE.md):

Page Load Time: <2s
API Response (P95): <300ms
DB Query (P95): <50ms
Availability: 99.9%
Error Rate: <0.1%

Assessment: ✅ Targets are appropriate for MVP and early growth

3.2 Scalability by Layer

3.2.1 API Layer (API Gateway + Lambda) ✅

Current Capacity:

  • API Gateway: 10,000 requests/second (soft limit, can be increased)
  • Lambda: 1,000 concurrent executions (default, can be increased to 100,000+)
  • Lambda timeout: 30-120 seconds (appropriate)

Scalability Rating: 9/10 - Excellent

Bottlenecks:

  • API Gateway throttling at 10K req/sec (requires AWS support request)
  • Lambda cold starts with VPC (5-10 seconds)

Recommendations:

For 10K-100K users:
  - Current config adequate
  - Monitor concurrent execution metrics
  - Request limit increase if approaching 8K req/sec

For 100K-1M users:
  - Consider Provisioned Concurrency for critical Lambdas ($40/month per instance)
  - Implement caching layer (ElastiCache or CloudFront)
  - Optimize Lambda memory allocation based on metrics

3.2.2 Database Layer (Aurora Serverless v2) ✅

Current Capacity:

  • Min ACU: 0.5 (1 GB RAM, ~2 vCPU)
  • Max ACU: 16 (32 GB RAM, ~64 vCPU)
  • Data API throughput: ~1,000 transactions/second
  • Storage: Unlimited (auto-scales to 128 TB)

Scalability Rating: 8/10 - Very Good

Projected Capacity:

1,000 users: 0.5-1 ACU (current)
10,000 users: 2-4 ACU
100,000 users: 8-16 ACU
1,000,000 users: 32-64 ACU (need to increase max_capacity)

Cost scaling:
  1K users: $30-60/month
  10K users: $200-400/month
  100K users: $800-1,600/month
  1M users: $3,000-6,000/month (consider provisioned instances)

Bottlenecks:

  • Connection pooling not implemented (Data API doesn’t support traditional pooling)
  • No read replicas (all traffic to primary)
  • Full-text search in database (should move to OpenSearch at scale)

Recommendations:

For 10K-50K users:
  - Current config adequate
  - Monitor ACU utilization
  - Implement query optimization

For 50K-100K users:
  - Add Aurora read replica for read-heavy queries
  - Implement caching layer (ElastiCache)
  - Optimize expensive queries (full-text search)

For 100K+ users:
  - Consider provisioned Aurora instances (more cost-effective at scale)
  - Implement OpenSearch for search/discovery
  - Add read replicas in multiple AZs
  - Consider sharding strategy for multi-tenant isolation

3.2.3 AI Generation Pipeline (Step Functions + Bedrock) ✅

Current Capacity:

  • Step Functions Express: 100,000 concurrent executions
  • Bedrock API: Depends on model and account limits
  • HeyGen API: Rate limit unknown (vendor-dependent)

Scalability Rating: 7/10 - Good with Caveats

Bottlenecks:

  1. Bedrock Throttling: Default quota varies by model
    • Claude 3 Sonnet: ~400 requests/minute
    • Need to request quota increases for high volume
  2. HeyGen Rate Limits: Unknown, vendor-dependent
    • Polling-based status checking (30-60 second intervals)
    • Video generation time: 5-30 minutes per video
    • Max concurrent videos: Unknown
  3. Step Functions Express Timeout: 5 minutes max
    • Current workflow with video polling can exceed this
    • Risk: Workflow timeout before video completes

Recommendations:

Immediate (P1):
  1. Request Bedrock quota increase:
     - Claude 3 Sonnet: Increase to 1,000 requests/minute
     - Monitor usage via CloudWatch metrics

  2. Implement queue-based architecture for high volume:
     - SQS queue for generation requests
     - Lambda consumer processes queue
     - Decouples API response from generation time

  3. Add rate limiting on admin UI:
     - Max 10 course generations per admin per day
     - Prevents abuse and cost overruns

For High Volume (100+ generations/day):
  1. Batch processing:
     - Aggregate multiple course requests
     - Process during off-peak hours

  2. Caching:
     - Cache similar course outlines
     - Reuse lesson templates

  3. Alternative architecture:
     - Replace Step Functions with ECS Fargate for long-running jobs
     - No 5-minute timeout limitation
     - Better for video generation polling

Cost Management:
  1. Budget alerts:
     - Bedrock spend > $100/day
     - HeyGen spend > $200/day

  2. Cost per generation tracking:
     - Target: <$5 per course
     - Monitor and optimize prompts

3.2.4 Content Delivery (S3 + CloudFront) ✅

Current Capacity:

  • S3: Unlimited storage
  • CloudFront: Unlimited bandwidth
  • Amplify Hosting: Adequate for SSR Next.js

Scalability Rating: 10/10 - Excellent

No bottlenecks identified. This layer scales effortlessly.

Recommendations:

  • Continue current approach
  • Monitor CloudFront cache hit ratio (target >80%)
  • Implement S3 Intelligent-Tiering (already configured ✅)

3.3 Scalability Roadmap 

Phase 1: 0-10K users (Current MVP)
  Timeline: Now - Month 6
  Infrastructure:
    - Aurora Serverless v2: 0.5-4 ACU
    - Lambda: Default concurrency
    - No caching layer (database sufficient)

  Cost: $200-500/month
  Action: Monitor and optimize

Phase 2: 10K-50K users
  Timeline: Month 6-12
  Infrastructure:
    - Aurora Serverless v2: 4-8 ACU
    - Lambda: Request concurrency increase to 2,000
    - Add ElastiCache for caching layer
    - Implement read replicas

  Cost: $800-1,500/month
  Action:
    - Enable caching layer
    - Optimize database queries
    - Add environment separation (dev/staging/prod)

Phase 3: 50K-100K users
  Timeline: Month 12-18
  Infrastructure:
    - Aurora Serverless v2: 8-16 ACU
    - Lambda Provisioned Concurrency for critical functions
    - ElastiCache cluster mode
    - OpenSearch for search/discovery

  Cost: $2,000-3,500/month
  Action:
    - Migrate search to OpenSearch
    - Implement read replicas across AZs
    - Add cross-region DR

Phase 4: 100K+ users
  Timeline: Month 18+
  Infrastructure:
    - Aurora Provisioned instances (more cost-effective)
    - Multi-region deployment
    - Advanced caching strategy
    - CDN optimization

  Cost: $5,000-10,000/month
  Action:
    - Consider Aurora Global Database
    - Implement sharding if needed
    - Advanced performance optimization

4. Cost Optimization Opportunities

4.1 Current Cost Baseline

Estimated Monthly Costs (from technical-roadmap.md):

MVP Phase (1,000 users):
  RDS Aurora Serverless v2: $106
  ElastiCache Serverless: $15 (UNUSED ⚠️)
  Lambda: $20
  API Gateway: $3.50
  S3: $10
  CloudFront: $8.50
  Cognito: $27.50 (1K MAU)
  Route 53: $0.50
  CloudWatch: $10
  Total: ~$201/month

  Cost per user: $0.20/user/month

Assessment: ✅ Excellent - Well-optimized for MVP scale

4.2 Cost Optimization Opportunities

4.2.1 Immediate Savings (P1 - 1 week)

1. Remove Unused ElastiCache ⚠️

Savings: $15-60/month
Action: Comment out ElastiCache in Terraform
Risk: None (not currently used)
Timeline: 1 day

2. Optimize Lambda Memory Allocation

Savings: $5-10/month
Action:
  - Analyze Lambda metrics (memory usage, duration)
  - Right-size memory for each function
  - Example: Reduce 512MB functions to 256MB if < 200MB used
Timeline: 2-3 days

3. Reduce CloudWatch Log Retention for Dev

Savings: $3-5/month
Action:
  - Dev logs: 3 days (instead of 7)
  - Staging logs: 7 days
  - Production logs: 30 days
Timeline: 1 day

4. S3 Lifecycle Policies Optimization

Current: Transition to IA after 30 days ✅
Improvement: Add Glacier transition after 90 days
Savings: $2-5/month for AI-generated content
Timeline: 1 day

Total Immediate Savings: $25-80/month (~15-35% reduction)

4.2.2 Medium-Term Optimizations (P2 - 2-4 weeks)

1. Lambda VPC Removal (NAT Gateway savings)

Savings: $32/month base + $0.045/GB data transfer
Action: Migrate to Aurora Data API (no VPC needed)
Risk: 50-100ms latency increase per database call
Timeline: 2-3 weeks
Recommendation: Defer until post-MVP

2. Aurora Pause During Low Traffic

Savings: $20-40/month (for dev environment)
Action:
  - Enable auto-pause for dev Aurora cluster
  - Pause after 5 minutes of inactivity
  - Dev environment only (not production)
Timeline: 1 day
Note: May cause 20-30 second delay on first request after pause

3. CloudFront Cache Optimization

Savings: $5-15/month
Action:
  - Increase cache TTL for static assets (24 hours)
  - Implement cache-control headers properly
  - Monitor cache hit ratio (target >90%)
Timeline: 3-5 days

4. Implement Cost Allocation Tags

Savings: Enables tracking, not direct cost reduction
Action:
  - Tag all resources: Component, CostCenter, Environment
  - Enable Cost Allocation Tags in AWS Billing
  - Create cost reports by component
Timeline: 1 week
Benefit: Identify cost hotspots for future optimization

Total Medium-Term Savings: $57-95/month (~30-40% additional reduction)

4.2.3 Long-Term Optimizations (P3 - 1-3 months)

1. Reserved Capacity for Predictable Workloads

Applicable when: Consistent baseline traffic
Savings: 30-70% on Aurora, NAT Gateway, etc.
Action: Purchase 1-year reserved capacity
Risk: Reduced flexibility
Timeline: After 6 months of production metrics

2. Savings Plans for Lambda and Fargate

Savings: 17% (1-year) to 28% (3-year)
Action: Purchase compute savings plan
Risk: Committed spend
Timeline: After consistent usage pattern established

3. Multi-Region Cost Optimization

Action: Deploy in cheaper regions for non-latency-sensitive workloads
Example: Move S3 AI content storage to us-west-2 (~5% cheaper)
Savings: $5-10/month
Timeline: 2-3 weeks

4.3 Cost Monitoring Recommendations

Implement Cost Anomaly Detection:

Priority: P1
Timeline: 2 days

Action:
  1. Enable AWS Cost Anomaly Detection:
     - Detect unusual spend patterns
     - Alert on >$10 daily anomaly

  2. CloudWatch Billing Alarms:
     - Daily spend > $15 (warning)
     - Monthly forecast > $500 (critical)

  3. Cost Dashboard:
     - Weekly cost review
     - Cost per user metric
     - Cost by service breakdown

  4. Budget Alerts:
     - Set monthly budget: $300 (MVP), $500 (growth)
     - Alert at 80%, 100%, 120% of budget

Cost Optimization Checklist (Quarterly):

Every 3 months:
  - Review Lambda memory allocation
  - Review log retention policies
  - Review S3 lifecycle policies
  - Review Aurora ACU utilization (consider provisioned if consistently high)
  - Review CloudWatch metrics retention
  - Identify and delete unused resources
  - Review reserved capacity opportunities

4.4 Cost Projections 

Current (1K users): $200/month ($0.20/user)

Optimized (1K users): $130/month ($0.13/user)
  - Remove ElastiCache: -$15
  - Optimize Lambda: -$10
  - Reduce log retention: -$5
  - S3 lifecycle: -$5
  - CloudFront optimization: -$10
  - Aurora auto-pause (dev): -$25

Growth (10K users): $650/month ($0.065/user)
  - Economies of scale
  - Fixed costs amortized

Growth (100K users): $1,760/month ($0.018/user)
  - Further economies of scale
  - Caching reduces per-request costs

Key Insight: Cost per user decreases significantly with scale due to fixed cost amortization and economies of scale.

5. Security Posture

5.1 Current Security Implementation ✅

Overall Security Rating: 8/10 - Strong

5.1.1 Identity & Access Management ✅

Strengths:

AWS Cognito User Pools:
  - Email/password authentication ✅
  - Social login (Google, Facebook, Apple) ✅
  - MFA support (optional) ✅
  - Password policies (min 8 chars, complexity requirements) ✅
  - Email verification ✅
  - Account recovery ✅

Role-Based Access Control (RBAC):
  - User roles: ADMIN, PREMIUM, FREE ✅
  - Role enforcement in Lambda middleware ✅
  - Cognito groups for role management ✅

JWT Token Security:
  - Cognito-signed tokens ✅
  - Token expiration enforced ✅
  - Refresh token rotation ✅

Implementation Evidence:

// From backend/functions/courses/src/index.ts
const authContext = await requireAuth(event, USER_POOL_ID, CLIENT_ID);
if (event.httpMethod === 'POST') {
  await requireAdmin(authContext); // Admin-only operations
}

Recommendation: ✅ Well-implemented, no changes needed for MVP

5.1.2 Data Protection ✅

Encryption at Rest:

Aurora Database:
  - KMS encryption enabled ✅
  - Key rotation enabled ✅
  - Separate KMS key per environment ✅

S3 Buckets:
  - Server-side encryption (AES-256) ✅
  - Bucket key enabled for cost optimization ✅
  - Versioning enabled ✅

Secrets Manager:
  - Encrypted with KMS ✅
  - Automatic rotation policies (configured) ✅

Encryption in Transit:

API Gateway: HTTPS only ✅
CloudFront: HTTPS only ✅
Lambda → Aurora: TLS 1.2+ ✅
Lambda → Bedrock: HTTPS ✅

Recommendation: ✅ Excellent - Industry-standard encryption

5.1.3 Network Security ✅

VPC Configuration:

Private Subnets:
  - Aurora database isolated ✅
  - Lambda functions in private subnets ✅
  - No public access to database ✅

Security Groups:
  - Aurora: Only port 5432 from Lambda SG ✅
  - Lambda: Egress to internet via NAT ✅
  - Least privilege rules ✅

Public Access Blocks:
  - S3 buckets: Block public access ✅
  - Aurora: No public access ✅

Recommendation: ✅ Well-configured network security

5.1.4 Secrets Management ✅

AWS Secrets Manager Usage:

Stored Secrets:
  - Database master password ✅
  - Database connection info ✅
  - HeyGen API key ✅
  - OAuth client secrets (Google, Facebook, Apple) ✅
  - GitHub PAT ✅

Best Practices:
  - No secrets in code ✅
  - No secrets in environment variables (Lambda) ✅
  - Secrets rotation configured ✅
  - Recovery window for production (30 days) ✅

Recommendation: ✅ Excellent secrets management

5.2 Security Gaps & Recommendations

5.2.1 API Gateway Authorization Inconsistency ⚠️

Finding: Mixed authorization approach - some endpoints use API key, others use Cognito authorizer.

Evidence from api-gateway.tf:

# Courses endpoint: API key required
resource "aws_api_gateway_method" "courses_get" {
  authorization    = "NONE"
  api_key_required = true
}

# Enrollments endpoint: Cognito authorizer
resource "aws_api_gateway_method" "enrollments_get" {
  authorization = "COGNITO_USER_POOLS"
  authorizer_id = aws_api_gateway_authorizer.cognito.id
  api_key_required = false
}

Concern: API key provides basic authentication but:

  • API keys are meant for rate limiting, not authentication
  • API keys can be exposed in client code
  • No user context with API keys

Recommendation:

Priority: P2 - Post-MVP security hardening
Timeline: 1-2 weeks

Action:
  1. Audit all API Gateway methods
  2. Categorize endpoints:
     - Public (no auth): Course list (read-only)
     - Authenticated: Enrollments, progress, user data
     - Admin: Course CRUD, user management

  3. Standardize authorization:
     - Public endpoints: No authorizer, no API key
     - Authenticated endpoints: Cognito authorizer
     - Admin endpoints: Cognito authorizer + Lambda role check

  4. Deprecate API key usage:
     - Remove api_key_required from all methods
     - Keep usage plan for rate limiting only

  5. Benefits:
     - Consistent security model
     - Per-user rate limiting
     - Audit trail (who accessed what)
     - Better compliance posture

Migration Path:
  - Phase 1: Add Cognito authorizer to all authenticated endpoints
  - Phase 2: Remove API key requirement
  - Phase 3: Update frontend to always include JWT token

5.2.2 No Web Application Firewall (WAF) ⚠️

Finding: API Gateway and CloudFront not protected by AWS WAF.

Risk:

  • DDoS attacks
  • SQL injection attempts (less relevant with parameterized queries, but still a best practice)
  • XSS attempts
  • Bot traffic

Recommendation:

Priority: P2 - Before public launch
Timeline: 1 week
Cost: $5/month base + $1/million requests

Action:
  1. Enable AWS WAF on API Gateway:
     - Attach managed rule groups:
       - Core Rule Set (CRS)
       - Known Bad Inputs
       - Amazon IP Reputation List

  2. Custom rate limiting rules:
     - Max 100 requests/5 minutes per IP (global)
     - Max 20 requests/minute to /admin endpoints

  3. Enable AWS WAF on CloudFront:
     - Same managed rule groups
     - Geographic restrictions if needed

  4. CloudWatch metrics:
     - Monitor blocked requests
     - Alert on unusual block patterns

Cost Impact: $5-15/month (minimal)
Benefit: Significant security improvement

5.2.3 No Audit Logging ⚠️

Finding: Application logs exist, but no centralized audit trail for security events.

Missing:

  • Who accessed what data (user audit trail)
  • Failed login attempts
  • Admin actions (course creation, user role changes)
  • API access patterns

Recommendation:

Priority: P2 - Post-MVP
Timeline: 2-3 weeks

Action:
  1. Implement audit logging table:
     CREATE TABLE audit_logs (
       id UUID PRIMARY KEY,
       user_id UUID,
       action VARCHAR(100),
       resource_type VARCHAR(50),
       resource_id UUID,
       ip_address INET,
       user_agent TEXT,
       metadata JSONB,
       created_at TIMESTAMP
     );

  2. Log security-relevant events:
     - User login/logout
     - Failed login attempts (after 3 failures)
     - Password changes
     - Role changes
     - Course CRUD operations (admin)
     - Data exports

  3. Integrate with CloudWatch:
     - Send audit logs to CloudWatch
     - Create metric filters for suspicious activity
     - Alert on:
       - Failed login rate > 10/minute from single IP
       - Admin role granted
       - Bulk data export

  4. Retention:
     - Database: 90 days
     - S3 archive: 7 years (for compliance)

Cost Impact: <$10/month
Benefit: Security incident response, compliance

5.2.4 No Input Validation at API Gateway ⚠️

Finding: Input validation happens in Lambda functions, not at API Gateway.

Risk:

  • Lambda invocations for invalid requests (cost)
  • Potential DoS with large payloads
  • No schema enforcement at gateway

Recommendation:

Priority: P3 - Nice-to-have optimization
Timeline: 1-2 weeks

Action:
  1. Add request validation models in API Gateway:
     resource "aws_api_gateway_request_validator" "main" {
       name                        = "request-validator"
       rest_api_id                 = aws_api_gateway_rest_api.main.id
       validate_request_body       = true
       validate_request_parameters = true
     }

  2. Define JSON schemas for request bodies:
     - Course creation: title (required, max 500 chars), description, etc.
     - Lesson creation: similar validation

  3. Benefits:
     - Reject invalid requests before Lambda invocation
     - Reduce Lambda costs
     - Consistent error messages
     - API documentation via schemas

Cost Impact: $0
Benefit: Cost savings, better security

5.3 Compliance Considerations

Current Status: Not compliance-certified (GDPR, SOC 2, HIPAA, PCI-DSS)

Future Requirements (if pursuing certifications):

GDPR (if targeting EU users):
  - Right to be forgotten (user deletion) → Partially implemented
  - Data export functionality → Not implemented
  - Cookie consent → Not implemented
  - Privacy policy → Not implemented
  - Data retention policies → Partially implemented

  Timeline: 4-6 weeks
  Priority: P1 if launching in EU

SOC 2 Type II:
  - Audit logging → Need implementation (see 5.2.3)
  - Access controls → Implemented ✅
  - Data encryption → Implemented ✅
  - Change management → Need documentation
  - Vendor management → Need documentation

  Timeline: 3-6 months with auditor
  Priority: P2 before enterprise sales

HIPAA (if handling health data):
  - NOT APPLICABLE for current use case
  - If adding health/wellness courses with PHI, significant compliance work needed

PCI-DSS (payment processing):
  - Stripe handles card data ✅
  - No direct card storage ✅
  - Minimal PCI scope ✅

  Current: PCI-DSS SAQ A (lowest compliance level)
  No additional work needed ✅

5.4 Security Roadmap 

Immediate (P1 - Before Public Launch):
  - Enable AWS WAF on API Gateway and CloudFront (1 week)
  - Implement audit logging for security events (2-3 weeks)
  - Document data retention policies (2-3 days)
  - Create incident response playbook (1 week)

Short-Term (P2 - 1-3 months):
  - Standardize API Gateway authorization (1-2 weeks)
  - Implement GDPR compliance features (4-6 weeks)
  - Security penetration testing (2 weeks)
  - Security training for development team (ongoing)

Long-Term (P3 - 6-12 months):
  - SOC 2 Type II certification (6 months)
  - Advanced threat detection (AWS GuardDuty) (1 week)
  - DDoS protection (AWS Shield Advanced) ($3,000/month - defer)
  - Bug bounty program (ongoing)

Overall Security Assessment:

  • Current state: Strong foundation (8/10)
  • With P1 recommendations: Enterprise-ready (9/10)
  • With full roadmap: Industry-leading (10/10)

6. Operational Excellence

6.1 Current Operational State

Rating: 6.5/10 - Good foundation, needs improvement

6.1.1 Strengths ✅

Infrastructure as Code:

Terraform:
  - All infrastructure defined in code ✅
  - Remote state in S3 with locking ✅
  - Modular structure ✅
  - Environment variables for flexibility ✅
  - Proper tagging strategy ✅

Version Control:
  - All code in GitHub ✅
  - Branch protection on main ✅
  - Pull request workflow ✅

Logging:

CloudWatch Logs:
  - All Lambda functions log to CloudWatch ✅
  - Structured log format (JSON) ✅
  - Log retention policies (7-30 days) ✅
  - API Gateway access logs ✅
  - Step Functions execution logs ✅

Tracing:

AWS X-Ray:
  - Enabled on all Lambda functions ✅
  - API Gateway tracing enabled ✅
  - Step Functions tracing enabled ✅

6.1.2 Gaps ⚠️

1. No Operational Runbooks

Finding: No documented procedures for common operational tasks.

Missing:

  • How to deploy infrastructure changes
  • How to roll back a bad deployment
  • How to investigate high latency
  • How to handle database issues
  • How to respond to security incidents

Recommendation:

Priority: P1
Timeline: 2-3 weeks

Create runbooks for:
  1. Deployment Procedures:
     - Infrastructure deployment (Terraform)
     - Application deployment (Amplify)
     - Database migration
     - Rollback procedures

  2. Incident Response:
     - API Gateway 5xx errors
     - Lambda timeout issues
     - Database connectivity issues
     - High latency investigation
     - Security incident response

  3. Routine Operations:
     - Database backup restoration
     - Log analysis
     - Cost investigation
     - User support (password reset, data export)

  4. Maintenance:
     - Applying security patches
     - Dependency updates
     - Terraform provider updates
     - Database maintenance windows

Storage:
  - Git repository: /docs/operations/runbooks/
  - Include command examples, screenshots, troubleshooting steps

2. No Alerting Strategy

Finding: CloudWatch alarms exist but are minimal.

Current Alarms: None explicitly defined in Terraform

Recommendation:

Priority: P1
Timeline: 1 week

Critical Alarms (P1):
  1. API Gateway 5xx Error Rate > 1% for 5 minutes
     - SNS → Email to on-call engineer

  2. Lambda Error Rate > 0.5% for 5 minutes
     - SNS → Email to on-call engineer

  3. Aurora CPU > 90% for 10 minutes
     - SNS → Email to on-call engineer

  4. Aurora Storage < 10% free
     - SNS → Email to database team

  5. Step Functions Execution Failure Rate > 5%
     - SNS → Email to AI team

Warning Alarms (P2):
  1. API Gateway Latency P95 > 1 second for 10 minutes
  2. Lambda Concurrent Executions > 800 (80% of limit)
  3. Aurora Connections > 80% of max
  4. Daily cost > $20 (unusual spike)

Implementation:
  resource "aws_cloudwatch_metric_alarm" "api_gateway_5xx" {
    alarm_name          = "api-gateway-5xx-errors"
    comparison_operator = "GreaterThanThreshold"
    evaluation_periods  = "1"
    metric_name         = "5XXError"
    namespace           = "AWS/ApiGateway"
    period              = "300"
    statistic           = "Average"
    threshold           = "1.0"
    alarm_description   = "Alert when 5xx error rate > 1%"
    alarm_actions       = [aws_sns_topic.alerts.arn]

    dimensions = {
      ApiName = aws_api_gateway_rest_api.main.name
    }
  }

3. No Deployment Pipeline Automation

Finding: Deployments are manual or semi-automated.

Current:

  • Terraform: Manual terraform apply
  • Lambda: Manual zip and upload (via deployment scripts)
  • Frontend: Amplify auto-deploy on git push ✅

Recommendation:

Priority: P2
Timeline: 2-3 weeks

Implement CI/CD Pipeline:
  1. GitHub Actions workflow:
     - Trigger on pull request to main
     - Run tests (Jest, Playwright)
     - Run Terraform plan
     - Post plan as PR comment

  2. Automated deployment on merge:
     - Deploy Lambda functions
     - Apply Terraform changes (if any)
     - Run smoke tests
     - Notify team

  3. Deployment gates:
     - All tests must pass
     - Terraform plan reviewed by team
     - Manual approval for production

  4. Rollback automation:
     - One-click rollback to previous version
     - Automatic rollback on health check failure

Example GitHub Actions workflow:
  name: Deploy to Production
  on:
    push:
      branches: [main]

  jobs:
    deploy:
      runs-on: ubuntu-latest
      steps:
        - uses: actions/checkout@v3
        - name: Run tests
          run: npm test
        - name: Deploy backend
          run: ./scripts/deployment/deploy-backend.sh
        - name: Smoke tests
          run: npm run test:smoke
        - name: Notify team
          run: ./scripts/notify-deployment.sh

4. No Performance Baselines

Finding: No documented baseline performance metrics.

Missing:

  • What is “normal” API response time?
  • What is “normal” database query time?
  • What is “normal” Lambda duration?

Recommendation:

Priority: P2
Timeline: 1 week (plus 2 weeks data collection)

Action:
  1. Collect baseline metrics for 2 weeks:
     - API Gateway latency (P50, P95, P99)
     - Lambda duration by function
     - Aurora query performance
     - Step Functions execution time

  2. Document baselines:
     /docs/operations/performance-baselines.md

     Example:
       API Endpoints:
         GET /courses: P95 = 150ms, P99 = 300ms
         POST /enrollments: P95 = 200ms, P99 = 400ms

       Lambda Functions:
         courses-handler: P95 = 100ms, P99 = 250ms
         ai-generate-outline: P95 = 45s, P99 = 90s

       Database Queries:
         getCourses: P95 = 20ms, P99 = 50ms
         getUserProgress: P95 = 15ms, P99 = 30ms

  3. Set alarms based on baselines:
     - Alert if P95 > 2x baseline
     - Alert if P99 > 3x baseline

  4. Review baselines quarterly:
     - Update as system evolves
     - Adjust alarms accordingly

6.2 Operational Recommendations

6.2.1 On-Call Rotation

Recommendation:

Priority: P1 - Before public launch
Timeline: 1 week setup

Setup:
  1. Define on-call schedule:
     - Primary on-call: 1 week rotation
     - Secondary on-call: 1 week rotation
     - Escalation: Team lead

  2. On-call responsibilities:
     - Respond to critical alerts within 15 minutes
     - Triage and resolve or escalate incidents
     - Document incidents in postmortem

  3. On-call tooling:
     - PagerDuty or similar (or use SNS → SMS)
     - Slack integration for alerts
     - Runbook access

  4. On-call compensation:
     - Determine compensation policy
     - Rotate fairly across team

Cost: PagerDuty ~$25/user/month (optional, can use SNS)

6.2.2 Incident Management Process

Recommendation:

Priority: P1
Timeline: 1 week

Incident Severity Levels:
  SEV 1 (Critical):
    - Platform completely down
    - Data loss or corruption
    - Security breach
    Response: Immediate (15 minutes)
    Communication: Hourly updates to stakeholders

  SEV 2 (High):
    - Degraded performance (>50% of users affected)
    - Partial feature outage
    - Elevated error rates (>1%)
    Response: 30 minutes
    Communication: Every 2 hours

  SEV 3 (Medium):
    - Minor feature outage
    - <10% of users affected
    - Performance degradation
    Response: 4 hours
    Communication: Daily updates

  SEV 4 (Low):
    - Cosmetic issues
    - Single user issues
    Response: Next business day

Incident Response Process:
  1. Detect: Alarm triggers or user report
  2. Acknowledge: On-call acknowledges within SLA
  3. Triage: Assess severity and impact
  4. Communicate: Notify stakeholders
  5. Mitigate: Temporary fix if possible
  6. Resolve: Permanent fix
  7. Postmortem: Document root cause and learnings

Postmortem Template:
  - Incident summary
  - Timeline of events
  - Root cause analysis (5 Whys)
  - Impact assessment (users affected, duration)
  - Action items (with owners and deadlines)
  - What went well / What could improve

6.2.3 Change Management

Recommendation:

Priority: P2
Timeline: 1 week

Change Types:
  1. Standard Changes (pre-approved):
     - Application code deployment (Amplify)
     - Lambda function updates
     - Database migrations (non-breaking)
     Approval: Automated via CI/CD

  2. Normal Changes:
     - Infrastructure changes (Terraform)
     - Database schema changes (breaking)
     - Dependency updates (major versions)
     Approval: PR review + manual approval

  3. Emergency Changes:
     - Security patches
     - Critical bug fixes
     Approval: Expedited review, postmortem required

Change Process:
  1. Request: Create PR with change description
  2. Review: Peer review + Terraform plan review
  3. Test: Automated tests + manual testing in staging
  4. Approve: Required approver signs off
  5. Schedule: Coordinate deployment time
  6. Deploy: Execute change with rollback plan ready
  7. Verify: Post-deployment validation
  8. Document: Update documentation and runbooks

Change Calendar:
  - Blackout periods: No changes Friday afternoon, holidays
  - Preferred change windows: Tuesday-Thursday, 10am-2pm EST
  - Emergency changes: Anytime with proper approval

6.3 Operational Maturity Roadmap 

Current State (Maturity Level 2/5):
  - Basic infrastructure automation ✅
  - Manual deployments
  - Limited monitoring
  - Reactive incident response
  - No formal processes

Target State (Maturity Level 4/5):
  Timeline: 6-12 months

  - Full CI/CD automation
  - Comprehensive monitoring and alerting
  - Proactive incident prevention
  - Formal change management
  - Regular performance reviews
  - Chaos engineering (optional)

Roadmap:
  Month 1-2:
    - Create runbooks (P1)
    - Implement alerting strategy (P1)
    - Set up on-call rotation (P1)
    - Document incident response process (P1)

  Month 3-4:
    - Implement CI/CD pipeline (P2)
    - Establish performance baselines (P2)
    - Formalize change management (P2)
    - Quarterly operations review

  Month 5-6:
    - Advanced monitoring (custom metrics)
    - Automated testing expansion
    - Disaster recovery drills
    - Capacity planning process

  Month 7-12:
    - Continuous improvement cycle
    - SRE practices (SLOs, error budgets)
    - Chaos engineering (optional)
    - Operational excellence reviews

7. Reliability & Resilience

7.1 Current Reliability Assessment

Overall Reliability Rating: 7/10 - Good with Gaps

Availability Target: 99.9% (8.76 hours downtime/year)

7.1.1 Strengths ✅

1. Multi-AZ Deployment

Aurora Serverless v2:
  - Automatic multi-AZ deployment ✅
  - Automatic failover within 30-60 seconds ✅
  - Read/write split capability ✅

Lambda:
  - Automatic multi-AZ execution ✅
  - No single point of failure ✅

S3:
  - 11 nines durability (99.999999999%) ✅
  - Automatic cross-AZ replication ✅

2. Automatic Scaling

Aurora Serverless v2:
  - Auto-scales from 0.5 to 16 ACU ✅
  - Scales in < 1 second ✅

Lambda:
  - Auto-scales to 1,000 concurrent executions ✅
  - No capacity planning needed ✅

API Gateway:
  - Automatic scaling (10K req/sec) ✅

3. Error Handling

Lambda:
  - Retry logic in Step Functions ✅
  - Error handling in business logic ✅
  - Structured error responses ✅

Step Functions:
  - Catch blocks for all states ✅
  - Error state machine defined ✅
  - Retry with exponential backoff ✅

7.1.2 Reliability Gaps ⚠️

1. No Cross-Region Redundancy

Risk Level: HIGH (for production) Impact: Regional outage = complete service outage Probability: Low (but catastrophic)

Current: Single region (us-east-1)

Recommendation:

Priority: P2 - Before enterprise customers
Timeline: 4-6 weeks
Effort: High

Option 1: Active-Passive Multi-Region (Recommended)
  Primary: us-east-1 (current)
  Failover: us-west-2

  Architecture:
    - Aurora Global Database (1-second replication lag)
    - Lambda functions deployed to both regions
    - Route 53 health checks with automatic failover
    - S3 Cross-Region Replication for AI content

  Cost: +$300-500/month
  RTO: 10-15 minutes (manual promotion)
  RPO: < 1 second (database), < 24 hours (S3)

  Deployment:
    Week 1-2: Deploy infrastructure to us-west-2
    Week 3: Configure Aurora Global Database
    Week 4: Set up Route 53 failover
    Week 5-6: Test failover scenarios

Option 2: Active-Active Multi-Region (Not Recommended for MVP)
  - Complex setup
  - Data consistency challenges
  - Higher cost
  - Defer to post-product-market-fit

Option 3: Backup Region (Minimal)
  - Infrastructure-as-code ready to deploy
  - Restore from snapshot in failover region
  - RTO: 2-4 hours
  - RPO: Up to 24 hours
  - Cost: Minimal (only snapshots)
  - Sufficient for MVP

Immediate Action (P1):

  • Document disaster recovery procedures ✅
  • Test Aurora snapshot restoration quarterly ✅
  • Store Terraform state in S3 with versioning ✅ (already done)

2. No Circuit Breaker Pattern

Risk Level: MEDIUM Impact: Cascading failures from downstream service outages Probability: Medium (especially for third-party APIs)

Finding: Direct calls to external services (HeyGen, Bedrock) without circuit breakers.

Problem:

  • If HeyGen API is slow/down, Lambda functions timeout
  • Timeouts consume Lambda concurrency
  • Potential resource exhaustion

Recommendation:

Priority: P2
Timeline: 1-2 weeks

Implement Circuit Breaker:
  1. Add circuit breaker library:
     npm install opossum

  2. Wrap external API calls:
     import CircuitBreaker from 'opossum';

     const heygenBreaker = new CircuitBreaker(heygenClient.createVideo, {
       timeout: 5000,           // Fail fast after 5 seconds
       errorThresholdPercentage: 50,  // Open circuit if >50% errors
       resetTimeout: 30000,     // Try again after 30 seconds
       fallback: () => ({ status: 'queued' })  // Graceful degradation
     });

  3. Add retry logic with exponential backoff:
     const retry = require('async-retry');

     await retry(async () => {
       return await heygenBreaker.fire(videoParams);
     }, {
       retries: 3,
       minTimeout: 1000,
       maxTimeout: 10000
     });

  4. Monitor circuit breaker state:
     - CloudWatch custom metric: Circuit open/closed
     - Alert when circuit opens (indicates downstream issue)

Benefits:
  - Prevent cascading failures
  - Fail fast and gracefully
  - Preserve Lambda concurrency
  - Better user experience

3. No Rate Limiting on External APIs

Risk Level: MEDIUM Impact: API quota exhaustion, throttling errors Probability: High (as usage scales)

Finding: No rate limiting on Bedrock, HeyGen API calls.

Problem:

  • Bedrock has per-account quotas (e.g., 400 req/min for Claude)
  • HeyGen has unknown rate limits
  • Burst of admin requests can exhaust quotas

Recommendation:

Priority: P2
Timeline: 1 week

Implement Rate Limiting:
  1. Admin UI rate limiting:
     - Max 10 course generations per admin per day
     - Max 5 video regenerations per hour
     - Enforce in frontend and backend

  2. Token bucket algorithm for Bedrock:
     class BedrockRateLimiter {
       private tokens = 400;  // Requests per minute
       private lastRefill = Date.now();

       async acquire() {
         this.refill();
         if (this.tokens < 1) {
           await this.sleep(this.timeUntilRefill());
         }
         this.tokens--;
       }

       private refill() {
         const now = Date.now();
         const elapsed = now - this.lastRefill;
         this.tokens = Math.min(400, this.tokens + (elapsed / 60000) * 400);
         this.lastRefill = now;
       }
     }

  3. Queue-based processing:
     - Use SQS queue for generation requests
     - Lambda consumer processes with rate limiting
     - Decouples API response from processing

  4. Monitoring:
     - Track API quota usage
     - Alert when approaching limits
     - Request quota increases proactively

Benefits:
  - Prevent quota exhaustion
  - Smooth traffic to external APIs
  - Better cost control
  - Predictable performance

4. Single Point of Failure: NAT Gateway

Risk Level: LOW-MEDIUM Impact: VPC Lambda functions cannot access internet Probability: Low (AWS availability)

Current: Single NAT Gateway in one AZ

Recommendation:

Priority: P3 - Low priority (AWS availability is high)
Timeline: 1 day

Action (if needed):
  - Deploy NAT Gateway in second AZ
  - Update route tables
  - Cost: +$32/month

Alternative (Recommended):
  - Migrate to Aurora Data API (no NAT needed)
  - Remove VPC from most Lambdas
  - Eliminates NAT Gateway SPOF and cost

7.2 Resilience Patterns

7.2.1 Retry Strategy ✅

Current Implementation: Good

Step Functions:
  - Automatic retry with exponential backoff ✅
  - Catch blocks for error handling ✅

Lambda:
  - Retry logic in business logic ✅
  - Idempotent operations ✅

Enhancement:

Recommendation: Add jitter to retries
  - Prevents thundering herd problem
  - Spreads retry load over time

Implementation:
  await retry(async () => operation(), {
    retries: 3,
    minTimeout: 1000,
    maxTimeout: 10000,
    randomize: true  // Add jitter
  });

7.2.2 Graceful Degradation

Current: Limited graceful degradation

Recommendation:

Priority: P2
Timeline: 2-3 weeks

Implement Graceful Degradation:
  1. Video generation failure:
     - Save course without video ✅ (already implemented)
     - Allow manual video upload later

  2. Thumbnail generation failure:
     - Use default placeholder thumbnail
     - Retry in background

  3. Recommendation engine failure:
     - Fall back to popular courses
     - Don't fail entire page load

  4. Analytics service failure:
     - Show cached data
     - Display "Data may be stale" message

  5. Search service failure (future):
     - Fall back to database full-text search
     - Reduced functionality but functional

Example:
  try {
    recommendations = await recommendationService.get(userId);
  } catch (error) {
    logger.warn('Recommendations failed, using fallback', error);
    recommendations = await courseService.getPopularCourses(5);
  }

7.2.3 Idempotency

Current: Partially implemented

Recommendation:

Priority: P2
Timeline: 1-2 weeks

Ensure Idempotency:
  1. Course creation:
     - Check for duplicate by admin + title
     - Return existing if duplicate

  2. Enrollment:
     - Unique constraint on (user_id, course_id) ✅
     - Return existing enrollment if duplicate

  3. Progress tracking:
     - Upsert operation (UPDATE or INSERT)
     - Prevent duplicate progress records

  4. AI generation:
     - Job ID as idempotency key
     - Check for existing job before starting new

  5. Payment processing:
     - Stripe idempotency keys ✅
     - Prevent duplicate charges

Implementation:
  // Idempotent enrollment
  try {
    return await enrollmentRepo.create(userId, courseId);
  } catch (error) {
    if (error.code === '23505') {  // Unique constraint violation
      return await enrollmentRepo.get(userId, courseId);
    }
    throw error;
  }

7.3 Availability Calculation

Current Architecture Availability:

Component Availability:
  - API Gateway: 99.95%
  - Lambda: 99.95%
  - Aurora Multi-AZ: 99.95%
  - S3: 99.99%
  - CloudFront: 99.9%
  - Cognito: 99.9%

System Availability (Serial Dependencies):
  99.95% × 99.95% × 99.95% × 99.9% = 99.75%

  Downtime: ~22 hours/year

Target: 99.9% (8.76 hours/year)
Gap: -13.24 hours/year (needs improvement)

Improvements to Reach 99.9%:

1. Reduce single points of failure:
   - Multi-region deployment: +0.1% availability
   - Circuit breakers: +0.05% availability
   - Graceful degradation: +0.05% availability

2. Improve monitoring and faster incident response:
   - Proactive alerting: -50% MTTR (Mean Time To Recovery)
   - Runbooks: -30% MTTR
   - On-call rotation: -20% MTTR

3. Improved testing:
   - Chaos engineering: Identify issues before users do
   - Disaster recovery drills: Faster recovery

Projected Availability with Improvements: 99.92%
Downtime: ~7 hours/year (meets target ✅)

7.4 Reliability Roadmap 

Immediate (P1 - 1-2 weeks):
  - Document disaster recovery procedures
  - Test Aurora snapshot restoration
  - Implement critical CloudWatch alarms
  - Create incident response playbook

Short-Term (P2 - 1-3 months):
  - Implement circuit breaker pattern
  - Add rate limiting for external APIs
  - Ensure idempotency across all mutations
  - Graceful degradation for non-critical features
  - Quarterly DR drills

Medium-Term (P3 - 3-6 months):
  - Multi-region deployment (active-passive)
  - Cross-region replication for S3
  - Aurora Global Database
  - Chaos engineering experiments

Long-Term (6-12 months):
  - Advanced resilience patterns
  - Service mesh (if microservices expand)
  - Automated failover testing
  - SRE practices (SLOs, error budgets)

8. AWS Well-Architected Framework Alignment

8.1 Framework Overview

The AWS Well-Architected Framework provides best practices across six pillars:

  1. Operational Excellence
  2. Security
  3. Reliability
  4. Performance Efficiency
  5. Cost Optimization
  6. Sustainability

Overall Assessment: 7.2/10 - Good alignment with room for improvement

8.2 Pillar-by-Pillar Assessment

8.2.1 Operational Excellence

Score: 6.5/10

Strengths:

  • Infrastructure as Code (Terraform) ✅
  • Version control for all code ✅
  • Automated deployments (Amplify) ✅
  • Structured logging ✅
  • X-Ray tracing enabled ✅

Gaps:

  • Limited operational runbooks ⚠️
  • Manual Terraform deployments ⚠️
  • No formal incident management process ⚠️
  • Limited monitoring dashboards ⚠️
  • No performance baselines ⚠️

Recommendations: See Section 6 (Operational Excellence)

8.2.2 Security

Score: 8/10

Strengths:

  • Encryption at rest and in transit ✅
  • IAM least privilege ✅
  • Secrets Manager for credentials ✅
  • VPC network isolation ✅
  • Multi-factor authentication support ✅
  • Security groups properly configured ✅

Gaps:

  • No AWS WAF ⚠️
  • Inconsistent API authorization ⚠️
  • No security audit logging ⚠️
  • No compliance certifications ⚠️

Recommendations: See Section 5 (Security Posture)

8.2.3 Reliability

Score: 7/10

Strengths:

  • Multi-AZ deployment ✅
  • Automatic scaling ✅
  • Error handling in code ✅
  • Backups configured ✅
  • Step Functions retry logic ✅

Gaps:

  • No cross-region redundancy ⚠️
  • No circuit breaker pattern ⚠️
  • No DR testing ⚠️
  • Single NAT Gateway ⚠️

Recommendations: See Section 7 (Reliability & Resilience)

8.2.4 Performance Efficiency

Score: 7.5/10

Strengths:

  • Serverless architecture (auto-scaling) ✅
  • CloudFront CDN ✅
  • Database indexes optimized ✅
  • Lambda memory sizing ✅
  • S3 Intelligent-Tiering ✅

Gaps:

  • ElastiCache provisioned but unused ⚠️
  • No caching layer implemented ⚠️
  • Lambda VPC cold starts ⚠️
  • No performance testing ⚠️

Recommendations: See Section 3 (Scalability Assessment)

8.2.5 Cost Optimization

Score: 7/10

Strengths:

  • Serverless pay-per-use model ✅
  • Aurora Serverless (scales to zero) ✅
  • S3 lifecycle policies ✅
  • Proper tagging for cost allocation ✅
  • Step Functions Express (90% cheaper) ✅

Gaps:

  • Unused ElastiCache costing $15-60/month ⚠️
  • NAT Gateway ($32/month) for VPC Lambdas ⚠️
  • No cost anomaly detection ⚠️
  • No reserved capacity planning ⚠️

Recommendations: See Section 4 (Cost Optimization)

8.2.6 Sustainability

Score: 8/10

Strengths:

  • Serverless reduces waste (no idle servers) ✅
  • Auto-scaling prevents over-provisioning ✅
  • S3 Intelligent-Tiering optimizes storage ✅
  • CloudFront reduces data transfer ✅
  • Aurora Serverless auto-pause (dev) ✅

Gaps:

  • Could optimize Lambda memory (lower carbon) ⚠️
  • Could use Graviton2 processors (30% more efficient) ⚠️

Recommendations:

Priority: P3 - Nice to have
Actions:
  - Right-size Lambda memory based on actual usage
  - Consider Graviton2 Lambda functions (arm64)
  - Implement auto-shutdown for dev environments

8.3 Well-Architected Review Recommendations

AWS Well-Architected Tool:

Recommendation: Use AWS Well-Architected Tool for formal review
Priority: P2
Timeline: 1 week

Action:
  1. Create Well-Architected Review in AWS Console
  2. Answer questions for all six pillars
  3. Review high-risk issues (HRIs) identified
  4. Create improvement plan
  5. Re-review quarterly

Benefits:
  - Identifies specific risks
  - Provides best practice guidance
  - Tracks improvements over time
  - No cost (free AWS service)

9. Prioritized Action Plan

9.1 Priority Matrix

Priority Recommendation Impact Effort Timeline Owner
P0 Resolve GraphQL/REST documentation mismatch High Low 1 week Architect
P0 Implement environment separation (dev/staging/prod) High Medium 2-3 weeks DevOps
P1 Create operational runbooks High Medium 2-3 weeks Operations
P1 Implement critical CloudWatch alarms High Low 1 week DevOps
P1 Enhance observability (dashboards, metrics) High Medium 2-3 weeks DevOps
P1 Implement cost tracking and anomaly detection High Low 1 week FinOps
P1 Document disaster recovery procedures High Low 3 days Operations
P1 Test Aurora backup restoration High Low 1 day Operations
P2 Remove unused ElastiCache (cost optimization) Medium Low 1 day DevOps
P2 Implement circuit breaker pattern Medium Medium 1-2 weeks Engineering
P2 Add rate limiting for external APIs Medium Low 1 week Engineering
P2 Standardize API Gateway authorization Medium Low 1-2 weeks Security
P2 Enable AWS WAF Medium Low 1 week Security
P2 Implement audit logging Medium Medium 2-3 weeks Security
P2 Implement caching layer (ElastiCache usage) Medium Medium 2-3 weeks Engineering
P2 Graceful degradation implementation Medium Medium 2-3 weeks Engineering
P2 Disaster recovery testing and drills High Medium 4-6 weeks Operations
P3 Lambda VPC optimization (Data API migration) Low Medium 2-3 weeks Engineering
P3 Cross-region redundancy Low High 4-6 weeks DevOps
P3 Performance baselines and testing Low Medium 2-3 weeks Engineering
P3 CI/CD pipeline automation Low Medium 2-3 weeks DevOps

9.2 Phased Implementation Plan

Phase 0: Immediate Actions (Week 1-2)

Goals: Fix critical documentation issue, implement basic operational excellence

Week 1:
  Day 1-2: Resolve GraphQL/REST mismatch
    - Update technical-architecture.md to reflect REST implementation
    - Create ADR-003 documenting decision
    - Remove GraphQL examples from documentation

  Day 3-4: Implement critical CloudWatch alarms
    - API Gateway 5xx error rate
    - Lambda error rate
    - Aurora CPU/storage
    - Step Functions failures
    - SNS topic for alerts

  Day 5: Cost tracking setup
    - Enable AWS Cost Anomaly Detection
    - Create billing alarms
    - Set up monthly budget

Week 2:
  Day 1-2: Document disaster recovery procedures
    - Aurora snapshot restoration steps
    - Terraform state recovery
    - Application recovery procedures

  Day 3: Test Aurora backup restoration
    - Restore latest snapshot to staging
    - Validate data integrity
    - Document restoration time

  Day 4-5: Start operational runbooks
    - Deployment procedures
    - Incident response template
    - Common troubleshooting steps

Deliverables:

  • Updated architecture documentation ✅
  • ADR-003 created ✅
  • Critical alarms configured ✅
  • DR procedures documented ✅
  • Backup restoration tested ✅

Cost Impact: $0 (no infrastructure changes)

Phase 1: Operational Foundation (Week 3-6)

Goals: Establish operational excellence, improve observability

Week 3:
  - Complete operational runbooks
  - Create incident management process
  - Set up on-call rotation
  - Implement enhanced observability:
    - CloudWatch Dashboard (API, Lambda, Aurora, Step Functions)
    - Custom business metrics (enrollments, completions, AI costs)
    - CloudWatch Insights queries

Week 4:
  - Remove unused ElastiCache (cost savings)
  - Optimize Lambda memory allocation
  - Implement cost allocation tags
  - Create cost reporting dashboard

Week 5-6:
  - Environment separation planning
  - Deploy staging environment
  - Configure CI/CD for staging
  - Test deployment pipeline

Deliverables:

  • Comprehensive operational runbooks ✅
  • Incident management process ✅
  • On-call rotation schedule ✅
  • CloudWatch dashboards ✅
  • Custom metrics implemented ✅
  • Staging environment deployed ✅

Cost Impact:

  • Savings: $20-40/month (ElastiCache removal, optimizations)
  • New costs: $100-150/month (staging environment)
  • Net: +$60-130/month

Phase 2: Security & Reliability (Week 7-12)

Goals: Harden security, improve reliability

Week 7-8:
  - Standardize API Gateway authorization (all Cognito)
  - Enable AWS WAF on API Gateway and CloudFront
  - Implement audit logging for security events
  - Security penetration testing

Week 9-10:
  - Implement circuit breaker pattern
  - Add rate limiting for external APIs
  - Ensure idempotency across all mutations
  - Implement graceful degradation

Week 11-12:
  - Create development environment
  - Document multi-environment workflow
  - Disaster recovery drills (quarterly)
  - Quarterly Well-Architected review

Deliverables:

  • Consistent API authorization ✅
  • AWS WAF enabled ✅
  • Audit logging implemented ✅
  • Circuit breakers implemented ✅
  • Rate limiting implemented ✅
  • Dev environment deployed ✅
  • DR drills completed ✅

Cost Impact:

  • New costs: $60-100/month (dev environment, WAF)
  • Total infrastructure: ~$350-530/month

Phase 3: Performance & Scalability (Week 13-20)

Goals: Optimize performance, prepare for scale

Week 13-15:
  - Implement caching layer (ElastiCache)
  - Optimize database queries
  - Add read replicas (if needed)
  - Performance baseline establishment

Week 16-18:
  - Lambda VPC optimization (Data API migration)
  - Remove NAT Gateway (if possible)
  - Implement performance testing
  - Load testing

Week 19-20:
  - Cross-region planning
  - Multi-region deployment (if needed)
  - Aurora Global Database setup
  - Route 53 failover configuration

Deliverables:

  • Caching layer implemented ✅
  • Performance optimizations complete ✅
  • VPC optimizations complete ✅
  • Multi-region capability ✅

Cost Impact:

  • Caching layer: +$60/month
  • Multi-region (if implemented): +$300-500/month

9.3 Success Criteria

Phase 0 Success (Week 1-2):

  • ✅ Documentation accurately reflects implementation
  • ✅ Critical alarms configured and tested
  • ✅ DR procedures documented
  • ✅ Backup restoration verified

Phase 1 Success (Week 3-6):

  • ✅ Operational runbooks cover all common scenarios
  • ✅ Incident response process established
  • ✅ Observability dashboards provide clear visibility
  • ✅ Staging environment deployed and functional
  • ✅ Cost reduced by $20-40/month

Phase 2 Success (Week 7-12):

  • ✅ Security posture improved (WAF, audit logging)
  • ✅ Reliability patterns implemented (circuit breaker, rate limiting)
  • ✅ Multi-environment workflow documented
  • ✅ DR drills completed successfully

Phase 3 Success (Week 13-20):

  • ✅ Performance targets consistently met
  • ✅ Caching reduces database load by 30-50%
  • ✅ System ready to scale to 10K+ users
  • ✅ Multi-region capability (if implemented)

9.4 Resource Requirements

Team Composition:

Phase 0 (2 weeks):
  - 1 Architect (50% time)
  - 1 DevOps Engineer (50% time)
  - 1 Operations Engineer (25% time)

Phase 1 (4 weeks):
  - 1 DevOps Engineer (100% time)
  - 1 Operations Engineer (75% time)
  - 1 Backend Engineer (25% time)

Phase 2 (6 weeks):
  - 1 Security Engineer (75% time)
  - 1 Backend Engineer (75% time)
  - 1 DevOps Engineer (50% time)

Phase 3 (8 weeks):
  - 1 Backend Engineer (100% time)
  - 1 DevOps Engineer (75% time)
  - 1 Performance Engineer (50% time)

Total Effort:

  • Phase 0: 2.5 person-weeks
  • Phase 1: 8 person-weeks
  • Phase 2: 12 person-weeks
  • Phase 3: 18 person-weeks
  • Total: 40.5 person-weeks (~10 person-months)

10. Conclusion

10.1 Summary of Findings

The Momentum LMS architecture demonstrates a strong foundation with several areas requiring attention before public launch. The serverless-first approach, comprehensive AI integration, and solid security implementation are commendable. However, operational maturity, observability, and disaster recovery planning need improvement.

Key Strengths:

  1. ✅ Well-designed serverless architecture leveraging AWS best practices
  2. ✅ Sophisticated AI content generation pipeline with Step Functions
  3. ✅ Strong security posture with encryption, IAM, and Secrets Manager
  4. ✅ Comprehensive Infrastructure as Code (Terraform)
  5. ✅ Normalized database schema with proper indexes and constraints
  6. ✅ Modern frontend with Next.js and TypeScript

Critical Issues:

  1. ⚠️ GraphQL/REST documentation mismatch - Immediate resolution needed
  2. ⚠️ Single environment architecture - Risk to production stability
  3. ⚠️ Limited observability - Hampers operational visibility
  4. ⚠️ No disaster recovery testing - Unknown recovery capability
  5. ⚠️ Unused resources costing money - ElastiCache unused

Overall Architecture Assessment: 7.5/10

  • Current state: Good foundation, suitable for MVP with < 1,000 users
  • With P0/P1 improvements: Enterprise-ready for 10,000+ users
  • With full roadmap: Production-ready for 100,000+ users with high reliability

10.2 Risk Assessment

High-Risk Areas:

1. Production Stability (Risk: HIGH):
   - Single environment exposes production to testing errors
   - Mitigation: Implement staging/dev environments (P0)

2. Data Loss (Risk: MEDIUM):
   - Backups exist but untested
   - Mitigation: Test restoration quarterly (P1)

3. Regional Outage (Risk: MEDIUM):
   - No cross-region redundancy
   - Mitigation: Multi-region deployment (P2-P3)

4. Cost Overruns (Risk: MEDIUM):
   - AI generation costs not actively monitored
   - Mitigation: Implement cost tracking and alerts (P1)

5. Security Incidents (Risk: MEDIUM):
   - No audit logging, no WAF
   - Mitigation: Implement audit logging and WAF (P2)

Risk Mitigation Timeline:

  • P0 items (Weeks 1-2): Address documentation and critical operational gaps
  • P1 items (Weeks 3-6): Improve observability and operational readiness
  • P2 items (Weeks 7-12): Harden security and reliability
  • P3 items (Weeks 13-20): Optimize for scale and performance

10.3 Investment Recommendations

Immediate Investment (Months 1-2):

Focus: Operational Excellence & Security
Budget: $60-130/month additional infrastructure (staging)
Effort: 10.5 person-weeks
ROI: High - Enables safe deployments, reduces downtime risk

Short-Term Investment (Months 3-6):

Focus: Security Hardening & Reliability
Budget: $60-100/month additional (dev environment, WAF)
Effort: 20 person-weeks
ROI: High - Meets enterprise security standards, improves SLA

Medium-Term Investment (Months 6-12):

Focus: Performance & Multi-Region
Budget: $300-500/month additional (multi-region)
Effort: 18 person-weeks
ROI: Medium - Supports geographic expansion, improves reliability

Total First-Year Investment:

  • Infrastructure: +$420-730/month (162% increase from $200 baseline)
  • Engineering Effort: 48.5 person-weeks (~12 person-months)
  • Justification: Necessary for production readiness and enterprise sales

10.4 Long-Term Vision

12-Month Target Architecture:

Availability: 99.95% (4.4 hours/year downtime)
Scalability: Support 100,000+ users
Security: SOC 2 Type II certified
Observability: Full visibility with proactive monitoring
Cost Efficiency: $0.015-0.02 per user/month at scale
Multi-Region: Active-passive deployment for DR

Strategic Recommendations:

  1. Focus on MVP refinement first - Don’t over-engineer prematurely
  2. Implement P0/P1 items before public launch - Non-negotiable
  3. Scale infrastructure with user growth - Avoid premature optimization
  4. Invest in operational excellence - Foundation for long-term success
  5. Plan for multi-region - But defer until user base justifies investment

10.5 Final Recommendations

Immediate Actions (This Week):

  1. ✅ Update documentation to resolve GraphQL/REST mismatch
  2. ✅ Implement critical CloudWatch alarms
  3. ✅ Document disaster recovery procedures
  4. ✅ Test backup restoration

Before Public Launch (Next 4-6 Weeks):

  1. ✅ Deploy staging environment for safe testing
  2. ✅ Implement comprehensive observability
  3. ✅ Create operational runbooks
  4. ✅ Set up incident response process
  5. ✅ Enable cost tracking and anomaly detection

Before Enterprise Sales (Next 3-6 Months):

  1. ✅ Implement AWS WAF
  2. ✅ Enable audit logging
  3. ✅ Standardize API authorization
  4. ✅ Implement circuit breakers and rate limiting
  5. ✅ Plan multi-region deployment
  6. ✅ Consider SOC 2 certification

Continuous Improvement:

  1. ✅ Quarterly Well-Architected reviews
  2. ✅ Quarterly disaster recovery drills
  3. ✅ Monthly cost optimization reviews
  4. ✅ Bi-weekly performance baseline reviews
  5. ✅ Regular security assessments

10.6 Conclusion Statement

The Momentum LMS architecture is well-designed for its current MVP stage with a solid serverless foundation that positions the platform for growth. The comprehensive AI integration via Bedrock and Step Functions demonstrates technical sophistication, while the use of Infrastructure as Code ensures reproducibility and maintainability.

However, operational maturity must improve before public launch. The prioritized action plan provides a clear roadmap from current state (7.5/10) to production-ready (9/10) over the next 12 weeks. The recommended investments in observability, security, and multi-environment infrastructure are essential for long-term success.

The architecture is sound. The operational practices need refinement. The roadmap is achievable.

With disciplined execution of the P0 and P1 recommendations, Momentum LMS will have an architecture that not only supports current requirements but scales gracefully to 100,000+ users while maintaining reliability, security, and cost efficiency.

End of Document

Appendix A: Reference Materials

Related Documents:

  • /docs/architecture/technical-architecture.md - System architecture (needs update)
  • /docs/architecture/technical-roadmap.md - Feature roadmap
  • /docs/architecture/adr-001-modularity-refactoring.md - Modularity ADR
  • /docs/architecture/adr-002-cross-region-bedrock-architecture.md - Cross-region Bedrock ADR
  • CLAUDE.md - Project overview and guidelines

AWS Resources:

External Resources:

Document Control:

  • Created: 2025-12-10
  • Version: 1.0
  • Next Review: 2025-12-24 (2 weeks)
  • Owner: System Architecture Team
  • Classification: Internal - Confidential

Back to top

Momentum LMS © 2025. Distributed under the MIT license.