Add /health handler to node server #2462
Conversation
|
The failing test is a little concerning. Is this something that @pcholakov should look at? |
|
I feel that I'm missing a little context on why this is needed, and if grpc's health check endpoint can be a reasonable replacement or not. |
|
The failing test case is captured here #2428. |
|
I'm on it; it's very odd - the only way I can explain what we're seeing is that occasionally the |
|
The motivation for this PR was that we were using in our tests (verification, e2e, local cluster) the ingress and/or admin http /health endpoint to await that the binary is up and running. With the provision step, this is not always possible anymore because we only start those components after the provisioning. That's why I used as a band aid the /metrics endpoint to await the start of the node server in those tests. I can look into the grpc health endpoint if you think that this would be more suitable. |
tillrohrmann
force-pushed
the
issues/2461
branch
from
27457d8 to
0350e0e
Compare
|
I've updated the PR to print the |
tillrohrmann
force-pushed
the
issues/2461
branch
from
0350e0e to
d8eb639
Compare
tillrohrmann
force-pushed
the
issues/2461
branch
from
d8eb639 to
f7204b7
Compare
This commit adds a very simple /health handler that returns 200 and the node identification information if the server is running. This allows to check whether the node server is running and what's the status of its components. This fixes restatedev#2461.
tillrohrmann
force-pushed
the
issues/2461
branch
from
f7204b7 to
7390ac6
Compare
This commit adds a very simple /health handler that returns 200 if the server is running. This allows to check whether the node server is running.
This fixes #2461.