-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.7k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Allow add/removing Bigtable clusters #2923
Allow add/removing Bigtable clusters #2923
Conversation
Hi! I'm the modular magician, I work on Magic Modules. Pull request statusesNo diff detected in terraform-google-conversion. New Pull RequestsI built this PR into one or more new PRs on other repositories, and when those are closed, this PR will also be merged and closed. |
Right, vendoring. I'll send those PRs. |
clusters[newId.(string)] = c | ||
} | ||
|
||
// create a list of clusters using the old order when possible to minimise |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is it possible to use the logic from https://github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/magic-modules/blob/master/templates/terraform/unordered_list_customize_diff.erb instead of reordering? If not, can you comment as to why?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Commented inline- I think that the TF-side ForceNew behaviour is incompatible with that method. We'd could do it, but we still end up needing to compare zone
and storage_type
across clusters.
if err != nil { | ||
return fmt.Errorf("Error setting cluster diff: %s", err) | ||
} | ||
|
||
// Clusters can't have their zone / storage_type updated, ForceNew if it's |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Does this have to be in the same function as the reordering, or could it be handled separately?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It requires the reordering to have happened already, so I prefer putting it here instead of breaking it out.
@@ -318,46 +317,110 @@ func resourceBigtableInstanceValidateDevelopment(diff *schema.ResourceDiff, meta | |||
return nil | |||
} | |||
|
|||
// resourceBigtableInstanceClusterReorderTypeList causes the cluster block to |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Would we be able to get rid of this entirely if we made cluster into a set? If so, let's get that on the 4.0.0 docket.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nope, because we need the ForceNew
behaviour. hashicorp/terraform#15420
Hi! I'm the modular magician, I work on Magic Modules. Pull request statusesterraform-provider-google-beta already has an open PR. New Pull RequestsI didn't open any new pull requests because of this PR. |
* `storage_type` - (Optional) The storage type to use. One of `"SSD"` or | ||
`"HDD"`. Defaults to `"SSD"`. | ||
|
||
!> Modifying the `storage_type` or `zone` of an existing cluster (by |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can you add a **Warning:**
prefix? https://github.com/hashicorp/terraform-website#callouts
Hi! I'm the modular magician, I work on Magic Modules. Pull request statusesterraform-provider-google-beta already has an open PR. New Pull RequestsI didn't open any new pull requests because of this PR. |
5b4b73b
to
b461524
Compare
Fixes hashicorp/terraform-provider-google#4318
Release Note Template for Downstream PRs (will be copied)