[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1556?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15092252#comment-15092252
]
Joshua Cohen commented on AURORA-1556:
--------------------------------------
I think that could get confusing in the degenerate case where someone
configures an http health checker but does not request *any* ports.
Also, we don't really have a concept of a "default" port, do we? Assuming I
haven't glossed over that for years, I'm going to assume you mean the case
where a task requests a single port not named "health" and configures a health
checker, then the health checker should use whatever port was requested. I
think that falls apart for the case where the task requests multiple ports,
none of which are named "health" because it's non-deterministic which port we
should use in that case?
Better to just be explicit about it?
If we *were* to default health checking to some requested port when no "health"
port is requested, I think we'd need a deprecation cycle as this would be
changing behavior that some have come to rely on (that is, not binding a
"health" would disable health checks).
> Configuring an http health checker without binding a health port should be
> considered invalid configuration
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: AURORA-1556
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1556
> Project: Aurora
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: Executor, Thermos
> Reporter: Joshua Cohen
> Priority: Minor
>
> Today if you configure an http health checker but don't bind a health port,
> we do not perform any health checks. Arguably this is invalid configuration
> and the task should be rejected. If you'd like to disable health checks (e.g.
> for a devel task), then no health check config should be present.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
