Docs: Example shows TTL and Interval; results in "Invalid check" error

[huttj]

Overview of the Issue

The Sample Payload for registering a service via HTTP includes a JSON body with both Interval and TTL. When using both of these, the API responds with Invalid check: Interval and TTL cannot both be specified.

Reproduction Steps

1. Run consul agent -dev
2. Run curl http://localhost:8500/v1/agent/service/register -X PUT -d '{"Id":"123456","Name":"test-service","Port":5000,"Check":{"HTTP":"http://localhost:5000/health","Interval":"10s","TTL":"15s”}}’

Consul info for both Client and Server

Configuration is default

Operating system and Environment details

n/a

Log Fragments

2019/08/16 14:34:36 [DEBUG] http: Request PUT /v1/agent/service/register (132.336µs) from=127.0.0.1:60983
2019/08/16 14:34:37 [DEBUG] manager: Rebalanced 1 servers, next active server is joshuahutt-mac.dc1 (Addr: tcp/127.0.0.1:8300) (DC: dc1)
2019/08/16 14:34:40 [DEBUG] consul: Skipping self join check for "joshuahutt-mac" since the cluster is too small
2019/08/16 14:35:19 [DEBUG] agent: Skipping remote check "serfHealth" since it is managed automatically
2019/08/16 14:35:19 [DEBUG] agent: Node info in sync
2019/08/16 14:35:40 [DEBUG] consul: Skipping self join check for "joshuahutt-mac" since the cluster is too small

[kkbatta]

We are seeing the same issue. Could someone explain why these two have to be mutually exclusive?
I do not want the call back to execute until the check fails 3 times consecutively. I am trying to achieve this by giving interval as 10s and ttl as 31s . I am sure I am reading something wrong.
Any pointers towards how this can be achieved will be greatly appreciated.
The document referred: https://www.consul.io/docs/agent/checks.html
Java client used: https://github.com/rickfast/consul-client
Sample code:

Check newHealthCheck = ImmutableCheck.builder().id("leader").name("leader").http("http://127.0.0.1:8080/health").interval("10s").ttl("31s").build();
client.agentClient().registerCheck(newHealthCheck);

[blake]

I do not want the call back to execute until the check fails 3 times consecutively.

@kkbatta, if I am understanding correctly, it sounds like you may asking for functionality which was introduced in #5739. Does this look like it would satisfy your requirement?

[ghost]

Hey there,

This issue has been automatically locked because it is closed and there hasn't been any activity for at least 30 days.

If you are still experiencing problems, or still have questions, feel free to open a new one 👍.