Dynamically lookup DeviceName for AMIs

[adamjohnson01]

Why do you want this feature?
We are using a custom ami which uses /dev/sda1 for the root device, currently there is no way for us extend the root volume of the ami as the launch configuration will add another disk using /dev/xvda

What feature/behavior/change do you want?
We would like the ability to override the DeviceName value using a value in the config file

[errordeveloper]

Would you mind sharing more info about the kind AMI that depends on this? Is it an in-house thing for you, or one from the marketplace or elsewhere?

[adamjohnson01]

No problem, the official Redhat and Centos AMIs use /dev/sda1 for the root device. We build our images on top of those.

[errordeveloper]

That sounds relatively mainstream to me, perhaps we can add image families for those and set device name based on the family, wdyt?

…

On Thu, 2 May 2019, 4:38 pm Adam Johnson, ***@***.***> wrote: No problem, the official Redhat and Centos AMIs use /dev/sda1 for the root device. We build our images on top of those. — You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#774 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAB5MS5D52EIEBVZO2KHVJLPTMDGPANCNFSM4HJ55PJQ> .

[adamjohnson01]

Just to clarify, when I say official Redhat/Centos I am referring to the base images, there are no eks images available, we build and maintain our own private eks images.

I think rather than hard coding values it may be a better idea to a populate the value dynamically, the information can be retrieved by describing the ami that is going to be used, this would make it a lot more flexible and remove the need to override anything. What do you think?

[errordeveloper]

That is a very good point indeed. Let's focus on retrieving it, rather then hardcoding. We may still want to add more parameters later, but I think the issue at hand is that there is a hardcoded value now that needs to be dynamically resolved based on AMI used. Beside that, I think we should open another issue to discuss RH image family, even if there is no public AMI, I think we should discuss whether a family should be defined instead of falling back on built-in AL2 family definition.

…

On Fri, 3 May 2019, 9:43 am Adam Johnson, ***@***.***> wrote: Just to clarify, when I say official Redhat/Centos I am referring to the base images, there are no eks images available, we build and maintain our own private eks images. I think rather than hard coding values it may be a better idea to a populate the value dynamically, the information can be retrieved by describing the ami that is going to be used, this would make it a lot more flexible and remove the need to override anything. — You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#774 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAB5MSYTCWGEUPUADACQO6TPTP3LDANCNFSM4HJ55PJQ> .

[adamjohnson01]

Cool, I will close my other pull request and work on getting the value dynamically.

I think that having a RH family makes sense, happy to discuss it in another issue.