LLMOps Done Right: Designing Traceable, Secure AI Systems for Production

Original Article

This article was originally published on NexAI Tech
. Explore the full library of AI, Cloud, and Security insights there.

LLMOps is the discipline of operationalizing large language models (LLMs) with production constraints in mind — including latency, security, auditability, compliance, and cost. Unlike MLOps, which centers around model development and deployment, LLMOps governs inference infrastructure, prompt workflows, model orchestration, and system observability.

This post outlines our LLMOps framework, informed by real-world deployments across OpenAI (Azure/OpenAI), AWS Bedrock, Google Vertex AI (Gemini), and
self-hosted OSS models (e.g., vLLM, Ollama)
.

Distinction: LLMOps ≠ MLOps
Dimension MLOps LLMOps
Lifecycle Train → Validate → Deploy Prompt → Retrieve → Infer → Monitor
Inputs Structured datasets Prompt templates + retrieved context
Outputs Deterministic predictions Stochastic, free-form completions
Control Points Training pipelines, feature sets Prompt templates, model routing, context injection
Observability Accuracy, drift, retraining Latency, token usage, prompt lineage, model fallback
LLMOps ensures that inference behavior is predictable, secure, and debuggable, across multiple models and tenants.

System Architecture: Core LLMOps Components

1. Prompt Management
   Each prompt template is versioned with metadata (e.g., prompt_id, hash, model context)
   Stored in a queryable store (Postgres / Redis / file-based) for reproducibility
   Templates are rendered dynamically with contextual injections (user, tenant, retrieval output)
   All downstream logs are tagged with prompt_id, version, model, and tenant_id

2. Model Orchestration and Routing
   Supported APIs:
   OpenAI API & Azure OpenAI (GPT-4, GPT-4-Turbo)
   AWS Bedrock (Claude 3, Titan, Mistral, Command R+)
   Google Vertex AI (Gemini Pro, Gemini Flash)
   Self-hosted: vLLM, Ollama, LLaMA 3, Mistral, etc.
   Routing Logic Includes:
   Fallback per use case (e.g., OpenAI → Bedrock → local)
   Cost-aware preference settings per tenant
   Model-switching based on prompt class (e.g., summarization vs reasoning)
   All routing operations are logged and audit-traced.

3. Guardrails & Output Filtering
   Regex filters for profanity, policy violations, and structure mismatch
   LLM-based scoring layers (e.g., verifying tone, groundedness)
   Structured output validation (e.g., enforced JSON schemas)
   Pre- and post-inference redaction when needed (e.g., for PII masking)
   We maintain fallback prompt versions and hard-fail logic where violations occur.

4. Logging, Auditing, and Traceability
   Each inference event logs the following:

Field Purpose
tenant_id Access scoping
user_id Attribution
prompt_id Prompt lineage
model_id Model/version used
tokens_in / tokens_out Cost & scaling metrics
latency_ms Monitoring + routing benchmarks
fallback_used Routing observability
Logs are streamed to OpenTelemetry, CloudWatch, and PostgreSQL with S3 archival for long-term audits.

1. Role-Based Access & Token Quota Enforcement We use scoped access to restrict which tenants or roles can:

View/edit prompts
Call specific model types (e.g., internal vs external APIs)
Bypass fallbacks or safety layers (for QA/debug)
Quotas are enforced via a token accounting layer with optional alerts, Slack/webhook notifications, and billing summaries.

LLMOps Infrastructure Stack
Layer Tooling / Methodology
Prompt Management PostgreSQL + hash validation + contextual rendering
Inference APIs OpenAI, Bedrock, Gemini, vLLM, Ollama
Retrieval Layer Weaviate / Qdrant + hybrid filtering
Routing Engine Rule-based fallback + tenant-specific override logic
Output Evaluation Embedded validators, regex checks, meta-model scoring
Observability OpenTelemetry + custom dashboards
CI/CD Prompt snapshot testing, rollback hooks, environment diffs
Security JWT w/ tenant + RBAC, VPC isolation, IAM permissions
Evaluation & Monitoring
Token efficiency: Monitored per prompt and model
Latency thresholds: Alerted for routing or model fallback
Prompt drift: Detected via A/B diffing of completions
Fallback rates: Reviewed weekly for prompt resilience
Tenant usage patterns: Visualized for FinOps and capacity planning

LLMOps in Regulated Domains
We implement LLMOps for:

BFSI: Token quotas, model audit trails, inference archiving, region-locking
GovTech: Prompt redaction, multilingual prompts, PII shielding
SaaS Platforms: Multi-tenant usage tracking, prompt version rollback, per-org observability
All LLMOps implementations comply with the principles of auditability, tenant isolation, and platform reproducibility.

Conclusion
LLMOps transforms AI systems from prototypes into maintainable, traceable infrastructure components.

When implemented correctly, it gives teams:

Prompt lineage and rollback
Cross-model inference routing
Guardrails and audit compliance
Cost and quota control at the tenant level
Confidence in reliability and explainability
It’s how we build LLM infrastructure that scales with users, governance, and regulation not just hype. Looking to build your own LLMops pipeline? Let’s talk strategy!

We implement LLMOps for:

BFSI: Token quotas, model audit trails, inference archiving, region-locking
GovTech: Prompt redaction, multilingual prompts, PII shielding
SaaS Platforms: Multi-tenant usage tracking, prompt version rollback, per-org observability
All LLMOps implementations comply with the principles of auditability, tenant isolation, and platform reproducibility.

Conclusion
LLMOps transforms AI systems from prototypes into maintainable, traceable infrastructure components.

When implemented correctly, it gives teams:

Prompt lineage and rollback
Cross-model inference routing
Guardrails and audit compliance
Cost and quota control at the tenant level
Confidence in reliability and explainability