That is wrong. It is proportional to sqrt(n). And the fact that in the blog post it looked quadratic rather than n^(3/2) suggests that the tool was producing misleading results.
This makes the time between arrivals, and the time to complete a job both exponential distributions. It also makes the number of arrivals while a job is being worked on into a Poisson distribution.
For a computer simulation you can simplify this even further by forgetting about time and focusing on events. If the worker is busy, the next event is either a new arrival or a job completion with a probability based on the rates.
It's tempting to model work time with an exponential distribution too, and there's a lot of theory for this case. Unfortunately, exponential distribution has a mode = 0, so it's not a good choice for real life process times. It's more common to see distributions like lognormal, gamma, Weibull, loglogistic, beta, or others with a mode > 0.
Edit: same qualitative result (substantially sublinear). Didn’t try to fit it to a distribution.
I don't think this is true, unless I'm misunderstanding your description. Do you mean if the work comes in faster than the worker can process it?
If work arrives at the same rate the worker can process it, the depth of the queue is a random walk starting at zero, with the restriction that it can never go below zero. I'm not sure how that behaves, but it definitely grows much less than linearly.
Python simulation code below: