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
Have you considered adding a simple healthcheck to the Dockerfile?
I think to do this you will need to change the base image from scratch to alpine, which will increase the resulting final image (on my system it more than tripled it), and I have an appreciation for keeping this as simple and minimal as possible. Also I am not super familiar with the ins and outs of exporters so I'm not really sure how much value a healthcheck will even add in this case.
The other possibility would be to add a built-in check function to the pihole-exporter itself, which might keep the bloat down a bit.
pvn@gyarados /home/pvn> docker image ls | grep pihole-exporter
pvnovarese/pihole-exporter latest 16e60d69390e 15 minutes ago 8.07MB
ekofr/pihole-exporter latest 35e4393afb6f 2 weeks ago 2.45MB
Adding such a healthcheck will only increase start time to one minute. This is because the first check fails and the next one is only one minute after. This is relevant for reverse proxies like traefik which remove routes when the container is not healthy.
Have you considered adding a simple healthcheck to the Dockerfile?
I think to do this you will need to change the base image from scratch to alpine, which will increase the resulting final image (on my system it more than tripled it), and I have an appreciation for keeping this as simple and minimal as possible. Also I am not super familiar with the ins and outs of exporters so I'm not really sure how much value a healthcheck will even add in this case.
The other possibility would be to add a built-in check function to the pihole-exporter itself, which might keep the bloat down a bit.
Anyway, all I did is change
and then add
I can submit a PR if you're interested in doing this.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: