feat(rpc/node): readiness check

[distractedm1nd]

Implements a readiness check on the node module.

Question: I have set the permission level to public, but remember that we removed all public methods in favor of read. Is this fine or should this method also be read?

---

Comes from a conversation with @joroshiba from Astria

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (4850c90) 51.97% compared to head (44cb8f8) 52.01%.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3118      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   51.97%   52.01%   +0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         178      178              
  Lines       11239    11239              
==========================================
+ Hits         5842     5846       +4     
+ Misses       4899     4898       -1     
+ Partials      498      495       -3     

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

[ramin]

arguably fixes #739

[ramin]

@distractedm1nd read perms IMO, no public

[Wondertan]

This needs a test imo

[distractedm1nd]

will add

[Wondertan]

CI needs a rerun

[renaynay]

Fine w me, utack on the RPC being started last. Does moving the construction of the rpc mod last affect the appends to the start hooks?

[renaynay]

Why is this breaking @distractedm1nd ?

[distractedm1nd]

adds new field to config, ah so not really breaking ig

[joroshiba]

@ramin I'd argue doesn't solve need for readiness endpoint because it's a json-rpc. HTTP probes in k8s are exclusively on GET, and JSON-RPC is exclusively post: https://kubernetes.io/docs/tasks/configure-pod-container/configure-liveness-readiness-startup-probes/#http-probes

[ramin]

@joroshiba was the original convo / request for a non-rpc readiness endpoint and not this?

[jcstein]

should this be documented? if so, how does one use it?