A check report is for whoever will do the fixing, and it has four parts that must be there.
A good report says where the check came from, the full request address, the command and what it printed. With it a colleague can repeat the check and see the same thing.
| In the report | Example |
|---|---|
| from where | the lab-client client |
| what and how | curl -fsS --max-time 3 http://192.0.2.10:8080/health |
| what it printed | curl: (22) … error: 503 |
| conclusion | the connection works, the application is not ready |
"The site is down" loses all of this: it is unclear whether there was a refusal, a timeout or an error answer.
You checked /health and are handing the task to a colleague. Which note helps them most?
-
It does not say where you checked from, which address, or what
curlprinted, so the colleague cannot repeat the check. -
Since a
503answer came back, the connection was made: the network works. -
The server answered with status
503, so it is running. A server that is down would give a refusal or a timeout.
The note says where the check came from, what was asked and what came back, and it shows the stage: the application's answer. The colleague can repeat the same check and start with the application.
Key points
- A report states where the check came from, the full address, the command and its output.
- The output shows the stage: a refusal, a timeout or the application's answer.