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.

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

Network queue count support #5438

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Nov 16, 2021

Conversation

slevenick
Copy link
Contributor

Fixes: hashicorp/terraform-provider-google#9847

If this PR is for Terraform, I acknowledge that I have:

  • Searched through the issue tracker for an open issue that this either resolves or contributes to, commented on it to claim it, and written "fixes {url}" or "part of {url}" in this PR description. If there were no relevant open issues, I opened one and commented that I would like to work on it (not necessary for very small changes).
  • Generated Terraform, and ran make test and make lint to ensure it passes unit and linter tests.
  • Ensured that all new fields I added that can be set by a user appear in at least one example (for generated resources) or third_party test (for handwritten resources or update tests).
  • Ran relevant acceptance tests (If the acceptance tests do not yet pass or you are unable to run them, please let your reviewer know).
  • Read the Release Notes Guide before writing my release note below.

Release Note Template for Downstream PRs (will be copied)

compute: added support for `queue_count` to `google_compute_instance.network_interface` and `google_compute_instance_template.network_interface`

@google-cla google-cla bot added the cla: yes label Nov 10, 2021
@modular-magician
Copy link
Collaborator

Hi! I'm the modular magician. Your PR generated some diffs in downstreams - here they are.

Diff report:

Terraform GA: Diff ( 7 files changed, 109 insertions(+))
Terraform Beta: Diff ( 7 files changed, 109 insertions(+))
TF Validator: Diff ( 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+))

@slevenick
Copy link
Contributor Author

/gcbrun

@modular-magician
Copy link
Collaborator

Hi! I'm the modular magician. Your PR generated some diffs in downstreams - here they are.

Diff report:

Terraform GA: Diff ( 7 files changed, 109 insertions(+))
Terraform Beta: Diff ( 7 files changed, 109 insertions(+))
TF Validator: Diff ( 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+))

@modular-magician
Copy link
Collaborator

I have triggered VCR tests in RECORDING mode for the following tests that failed during VCR: TestAccDatasourceGoogleServiceNetworkingPeeredDnsDomain_basic|TestAccCloudFunctionsFunction_vpcConnector|TestAccComputeInstanceFromMachineImage_basic|TestAccComputeInstanceFromMachineImage_overrideMetadataDotStartupScript|TestAccComputeInstanceFromMachineImage_diffProject|TestAccComputeInstanceTemplate_queueCount|TestAccComputeInstance_queueCount|TestAccComputeRegionNetworkEndpointGroup_regionNetworkEndpointGroupAppengineExample|TestAccSqlUser_postgresIAM You can view the result here: https://ci-oss.hashicorp.engineering/viewQueued.html?itemId=217052

@slevenick slevenick requested review from a team and melinath and removed request for a team November 10, 2021 18:47
@modular-magician
Copy link
Collaborator

Tests failed during RECORDING mode: TestAccComputeInstanceFromMachineImage_overrideMetadataDotStartupScript|TestAccComputeInstanceFromMachineImage_basic|TestAccComputeInstanceFromMachineImage_diffProject|TestAccCloudFunctionsFunction_vpcConnector|TestAccComputeRegionNetworkEndpointGroup_regionNetworkEndpointGroupAppengineExample|TestAccSqlUser_postgresIAM Please fix these to complete your PR

Copy link
Member

@melinath melinath left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This seems reasonable. The failing tests in VCR seem unrelated. It looks like it breaks the TFV downstream; it's possible that updating the downstream tests to include this field new field in their test data might be sufficient but it may be that we need to update the TPG dependency downstream (in which case we would have to merge this first and update afterward).

It would be great if you could try to get the downstream working prior to merge.

@slevenick
Copy link
Contributor Author

This seems reasonable. The failing tests in VCR seem unrelated. It looks like it breaks the TFV downstream; it's possible that updating the downstream tests to include this field new field in their test data might be sufficient but it may be that we need to update the TPG dependency downstream (in which case we would have to merge this first and update afterward).

It would be great if you could try to get the downstream working prior to merge.

Upgrading the version of TPG seems to fix it:

    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_storage_bucket (0.04s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/full_spanner_instance (0.04s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_access_context_manager_service_perimeter (0.04s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_pubsub_topic (0.04s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_filestore_instance (0.04s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/full_container_node_pool (0.04s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/full_sql_database_instance (0.04s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/full_storage_bucket (0.04s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_storage_bucket_iam_policy (0.04s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_storage_bucket_iam_member_random_suffix (0.04s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_project_iam (0.03s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_storage_bucket_iam_binding (0.04s)
    --- FAIL: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/full_container_cluster (0.05s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/full_compute_firewall (0.05s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_storage_bucket_iam_member (0.05s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/full_compute_instance (0.06s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_sql_database_instance (0.03s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_project_iam_member (0.04s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_kms_key_ring_iam_member (0.04s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_organization_iam_binding (0.04s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_kms_key_ring_iam_policy (0.05s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_project_service (0.06s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_project_iam_policy (0.06s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_project_iam_binding (0.05s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_kms_key_ring_iam_binding (0.03s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_kms_key_ring (0.02s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_project_in_org (0.02s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_organization_iam_policy (0.04s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_organization_iam_member (0.03s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_kms_crypto_key_iam_member (0.03s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_kms_crypto_key_iam_policy (0.04s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_compute_disk_empty_image (0.05s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_container_cluster (0.03s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_compute_global_forwarding_rule (0.03s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_compute_network (0.03s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_compute_subnetwork (0.03s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_compute_firewall (0.04s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_project_in_folder (0.03s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_pubsub_subscription (0.04s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_compute_disk (0.02s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_kms_crypto_key (0.03s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_kms_crypto_key_iam_binding (0.03s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_bigquery_dataset_iam_policy (0.03s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_project_update (0.04s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_bigquery_dataset_iam_binding (0.03s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_bigtable_instance (0.04s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_bigquery_dataset (0.03s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_bigquery_dataset_iam_member (0.05s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_project_create (0.02s)
    --- PASS: TestReadPlannedAssetsCoverage/example_project_organization_policy (0.03s)```

Container cluster test seems to fail, but that has to be unrelated to this PR.

@melinath
Copy link
Member

@slevenick great! 👍 would you like to make the downstream PR to do the upgrade? It basically requires adding a commit like hashicorp/terraform-provider-google@61e7a79 to a fork of the release branch you want to upgrade to, then using go get to install that forked branch in TFV

@slevenick
Copy link
Contributor Author

@slevenick great! 👍 would you like to make the downstream PR to do the upgrade? It basically requires adding a commit like hashicorp/terraform-provider-google@61e7a79 to a fork of the release branch you want to upgrade to, then using go get to install that forked branch in TFV

Yeah, I can do that. It requires merging this PR first and then making the release & upgrading TFV right?

Copy link
Member

@melinath melinath left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

yes, you'd have to fix the downstream after the next release (or at least after the next release is cut) so this would need to be merged first.

@slevenick slevenick merged commit a97d2e6 into GoogleCloudPlatform:master Nov 16, 2021
betsy-lichtenberg pushed a commit to betsy-lichtenberg/magic-modules that referenced this pull request Apr 25, 2022
* Add queue_number

* Add network queue

* Remove update test, add to instance template
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Allow queue count to be specified when declaring GCP compute instance network interface
3 participants