If all else fails you can overwrite the healthcheck command or even disable it altogether.
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.
Rules • Full Version
1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy
2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote
3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs
4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others
Loot, Pillage, & Plunder
💰 Please help cover server costs.
lol that second one is a terrible idea
Wouldn't you want to turn it off if it doesn't work reliably? I struggle to see the point of keeping around a health check that behaves erratically.
I suppose it’s a personal choice of where you set the bar for your systems.
Personally, as a software engineer who’s designed and built a lot of systems over the course of my career: nope - not if you want to just set it and forget it, that is. Which I do. And yes, most of the systems I’ve built professionally aren’t to that standard (mostly due to time constraints), which has consistently frustrated me, but you gotta be a little bit zen about stuff you don’t have complete ownership over.
Maybe your tolerance for manual intervention is higher than mine, but in terms personal standards, I don’t consider a system to be “done” until it’s configured to to handle itself resiliently and recoverably in all but the most catastrophic situations (I.e. basically, a hardware fault, or some sort of fairly serious upstream infrastructure failure).
All that said: YMMV. It’s a personal preference, and I know my standards would be considered abnormally strict by some.