Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

gke node pool: add 404 response code check on delete call #4747

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 29, 2021
Merged

gke node pool: add 404 response code check on delete call #4747

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
4 changes: 4 additions & 0 deletions mmv1/third_party/terraform/resources/resource_container_node_pool.go.erb
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -482,6 +482,10 @@ func resourceContainerNodePoolDelete(d *schema.ResourceData, meta interface{}) e
//Check cluster is in running state
_, err = containerClusterAwaitRestingState(config, nodePoolInfo.project, nodePoolInfo.location, nodePoolInfo.cluster, userAgent, d.Timeout(schema.TimeoutCreate))
if err != nil {
if isGoogleApiErrorWithCode(err, 404) {
log.Printf("[INFO] GKE node pool %s doesn't exist to delete", d.Id())
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I noticed that I made a mistake when sending this PR.

cl/371172872 was correct, but when I sent this OSS PR, the change was already made in OSS (just a few lines below). Since the code change in this PR wasn't what I intended to make, we may just revert this PR.

On the other hand, different from cl/371172872. This OSS code had an extra containerClusterAwaitRestingState before containerNodePoolAwaitRestingState. I wonder if we would introduce a similar bug if we simply revert this PR-- when deleting a node pool, should we raise an error if the cluster doesn't exist, or should we just print a log? If it's the latter, then we may fix this log message.

@rileykarson @ScottSuarez WDYT?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If the cluster doesn't exist we can assume the node pool doesn't. It's not immediately obvious what's wrong here to me.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

sounds good. Maybe I shouldn't say "fix this log message". Since we assume the node pool doesn't exist because the cluster doesn't, we can improve this log message to "[INFO] GKE cluster %s doesn't exist, skipping node pool %s deletion", nodePoolInfo.cluster, d.Id().

It's not that critical, just the code wasn't doing what I thought it would do, and I think maybe it would be confusing to others as well.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good point, we could make it more clear! If you're interested in changing it feel free, but I don't feel it's required.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

will do. Thanks

return nil
}
return err
}

Expand Down