fix: made studio start on different port if one is already in use

[neoandmatrix]

Description

The PR adds the functionality to automatically start a new instance of studio on a different port if the current port intended to be used is already in use.

An info is displayed that the specified port was already in use hence a different port is being used to the user.

Related issue(s)
Resolves #1797

[changeset-bot]

🦋 Changeset detected

Latest commit: 1416652

The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump.

This PR includes changesets to release 1 package

Name	Type
@asyncapi/cli	Patch

Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR

[github-actions]

Changeset has been generated for this PR as part of auto-changeset workflow.

Please review the changeset before merging the PR.

---
'@asyncapi/cli': patch
---

fix: made studio start on different port if one is already in use

- 43a8cb8: fix: made studio start on differnt port if one is already in use

Signed-off-by: Tushar Anand <tusharannand@gmail.com>

If you are a maintainer or the author of the PR, you can change the changeset by clicking here

Tip

If you don't want auto-changeset to run on this PR, you can add the label skip-changeset to the PR or remove the changeset and change PR title to something other than fix: or feat:.

[aeworxet]

@asyncapi/bounty_team

[neoandmatrix]

Hey @AayushSaini101 @Shurtu-gal if possible can this be reviewed and merged as #1824 is dependent on this.

Thanks

[neoandmatrix]

Hey @AayushSaini101 @Shurtu-gal any update on this ?

[Shurtu-gal]

I guess we should not go ahead with this iterative checking of ports. Can use stuff like: https://expressjs.com/en/api.html#app.listen

Basically mentioning port as 0 gets the OS to allocate a port.

[neoandmatrix]

I guess we should not go ahead with this iterative checking of ports. Can use stuff like: https://expressjs.com/en/api.html#app.listen

Is this specific to express.js? I believe we are not using express.

And also it might cause inconsistency as OS will always assign a random port with this method not only for case if port is already in use.

[Shurtu-gal]

We are using nodejs http which has the same functionality.

[neoandmatrix]

Okay but assigning a random port every time , would it be a good practice and experience ? Also it will make testing harder i believe.

[neoandmatrix]

One concern for me with the random port approach is testing these commands through puppeteer. As we need to navigate to the url for testing and since we include port in the url query parameters it being random would make it extremely difficult to navigate that site and test the instance as url would be random every time.

Inferring it from logs is extremely difficult as it would require a lot of parsing which make tests un-reliable.

Passing the port through flag is also not possible as we can only pass strings in parameter in tests but port require a number which cannot be passed.

[neoandmatrix]

Hey @Shurtu-gal with respect to above discussion how should i proceed with this ?

[Shurtu-gal]

I suppose we can wait for @AayushSaini101 or @Souvikns input also.

[AayushSaini101]

/u

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

[AayushSaini101]

https://expressjs.com/en/api.html#app.listen

I guess we should not go ahead with this iterative checking of ports. Can use stuff like: https://expressjs.com/en/api.html#app.listen

Basically mentioning port as 0 gets the OS to allocate a port.

I guess we can go for iterating port allocation to the server, explicitly allocating the port is not a proper way, wdyt @Souvikns

[Shurtu-gal]

I guess we can go for iterating port allocation to the server

Setting up server and checking each port is not the way to go according to me.

explicitly allocating the port is not a proper way

I couldn't understand this.

[aeworxet]

npm install portfinder installs four packages and takes 1.3 MB.
Are these quantities and size a significant concern in this case?

$ ls
async
debug
ms
portfinder

$ du -h
32K	./debug/src
68K	./debug
444K	./async/dist
112K	./async/internal
1.1M	./async
20K	./ms
24K	./portfinder/lib
40K	./portfinder
1.3M	.