Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
Share settings for sole-tenant node groups. #7059
Share settings for sole-tenant node groups. #7059
Changes from all commits
3674b7e
a61354f
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
This seems to be implemented correctly in terms of the API, but I cannot understand the design. The
project_id
is the only relevant information being passed here, why is it duplicated in both the key and value within a map? Am I missing something? Do you know if the API is setting up to have other values within theprojectConfig
nested object?We rarely deviate from the API, but it seems like a frivolous user experience to have to set the project id twice. We could relatively simply implement custom code to take a list of project id's from the user and supply the API with the map in the correct format. From my perspective, this could prevent user error. More context would help me understand however
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.
To be honest, I cannot defend this decision, but I don't think it's been designed while working on this particular feature. The semantics of sharing node groups across projects was derived from how reservations are shared (take a look at the shareSettings field of the Reservation resource). Is there anything we can do with that at this point?
Also, I've stumbled upon some custom code that seems to be responsible for shareSettings modifications when updating the Reservation resource:
mmv1/templates/terraform/update_encoder/reservation.go.erb
Could you let me know if that is something we need for the NodeGroup resource as well?
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.
We don't need to add update_encoder for
shareSettings
in the resourceNodeGroup
. The resource NodeGroup has propertyinput: true
. That means that a new resource is created no matter what field has changed (from the code, node_template is an exception).https://github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/magic-modules/blob/main/mmv1/products/compute/api.yaml#L8794
Waiting for @c2thorn 's opinions.
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.
@idyczko thank you for pointing out the
shareSettings
field in Reservation. Considering that we've already gone forward with it there, we may as well keep consistent here.@zli82016 is correct that a custom update encoder should not be needed since the resource cannot be updated in place at all. If this is no longer true, we can modify this in a separate PR.