chore:[#674] Tracker Checker: Ouput in JSON

[hungfnt]

No description provided.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 0% with 6 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 78.91%. Comparing base (9a1ce0e) to head (b27f002).

Files	Patch %	Lines
src/console/clients/checker/checks/health.rs	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️
src/console/clients/checker/checks/structs.rs	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️
src/console/clients/checker/checks/http.rs	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
src/console/clients/checker/checks/udp.rs	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop     #810      +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage    78.93%   78.91%   -0.03%     
===========================================
  Files          162      163       +1     
  Lines         9186     9186              
===========================================
- Hits          7251     7249       -2     
- Misses        1935     1937       +2     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[josecelano]

Hi @ngthhu looks good. Thank you! Just a couple of things.

Fix formatting errors

https://github.com/torrust/torrust-tracker/actions/runs/8813597282/job/24196746331?pr=810

Output should be only the json

Command:

cargo run --bin tracker_checker -- --config-path "./share/default/config/tracker_checker.json"

Output:

Running checks for trackers ...
{
  "udp_trackers": [
    {
      "url": "127.0.0.1:6969",
      "status": {
        "code": "ok",
        "message": ""
      }
    }
  ],
  "http_trackers": [
    {
      "url": "http://127.0.0.1:7070/",
      "status": {
        "code": "ok",
        "message": ""
      }
    }
  ],
  "health_checks": [
    {
      "url": "http://127.0.0.1:1313/health_check",
      "status": {
        "code": "ok",
        "message": ""
      }
    }
  ]
}

Output should not include:

Running checks for trackers ...

You should be able to parse the output as a json. For example:

cargo run --bin tracker_checker -- --config-path "./share/default/config/tracker_checker.json"| jq
    Finished `dev` profile [optimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 0.09s
     Running `target/debug/tracker_checker --config-path ./share/default/config/tracker_checker.json`
parse error: Invalid numeric literal at line 1, column 8
thread 'main' panicked at library/std/src/io/stdio.rs:1118:9:
failed printing to stdout: Broken pipe (os error 32)
note: run with `RUST_BACKTRACE=1` environment variable to display a backtrace

[hungfnt]

Is it good to name a file with a general name like structs.rs?

[josecelano]

Is it good to name a file with a general name like structs.rs?

Hi @ngthhu, Since it's a small mod and file, I don't see a big problem. In my case, when I read structs, I always think they must contain a kind of DTOs.

But, I would probably have named them:

output -> the module

pub struct Output {
    pub url: String,
    pub status: Status,
}

pub struct Status {
    pub code: String,
    pub message: String,
}

Or:

output -> the module

pub struct Result {
    pub url: String,
    pub status: Status,
}

pub struct Status {
    pub code: String,
    pub message: String,
}

[josecelano]

ACK b27f002