You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
In #58 it's noted that node is used in the example without being defined in the specification. While I agree that the functionality requested in #58 may be important, I'd suggest that node or some other unique identifier is needed.
The specification states:
Since each sub-component may be backed by several nodes with varying health statuses, these keys point to arrays of objects. In case of a single-node sub-component (or if presence of nodes is not relevant), a single-element array SHOULD be used as the value, for consistency.
Since an array SHOULD be used, I feel like this specification should also identify the field within the check that identifies which instance of the component the enclosed component represents. The word node or nodeId make sense for clustered operation but perhaps instance or instanceId would be more generic.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
In #58 it's noted that
node
is used in the example without being defined in the specification. While I agree that the functionality requested in #58 may be important, I'd suggest thatnode
or some other unique identifier is needed.The specification states:
Since an array SHOULD be used, I feel like this specification should also identify the field within the check that identifies which instance of the component the enclosed component represents. The word
node
ornodeId
make sense for clustered operation but perhapsinstance
orinstanceId
would be more generic.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: