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

Fix wrong initialization of maintenance_exclusion #2839

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 6, 2021
Merged

Fix wrong initialization of maintenance_exclusion #2839

Show file tree
Hide file tree
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
3 changes: 3 additions & 0 deletions .changelog/4372.txt
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
```release-note:bug
container: Fix crash due to nil exclusions object when updating an existent cluster with maintenance_policy but without exclusions
```
19 changes: 11 additions & 8 deletions google-beta/resource_container_cluster.go
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -2835,16 +2835,19 @@ func expandMaintenancePolicy(d *schema.ResourceData, meta interface{}) *containe
}
cluster, _ := clusterGetCall.Do()
resourceVersion := ""
// If the cluster doesn't exist or if there is a read error of any kind, we will pass in an empty
// resourceVersion. If there happens to be a change to maintenance policy, we will fail at that
// point. This is a compromise between code cleanliness and a slightly worse user experience in
// an unlikely error case - we choose code cleanliness.
exclusions := make(map[string]containerBeta.TimeWindow)
if cluster != nil && cluster.MaintenancePolicy != nil {
// If the cluster doesn't exist or if there is a read error of any kind, we will pass in an empty
// resourceVersion. If there happens to be a change to maintenance policy, we will fail at that
// point. This is a compromise between code cleanliness and a slightly worse user experience in
// an unlikely error case - we choose code cleanliness.
resourceVersion = cluster.MaintenancePolicy.ResourceVersion
}
exclusions := make(map[string]containerBeta.TimeWindow)
if cluster != nil && cluster.MaintenancePolicy != nil && cluster.MaintenancePolicy.Window != nil {
exclusions = cluster.MaintenancePolicy.Window.MaintenanceExclusions

// Having a MaintenancePolicy doesn't mean that you need MaintenanceExclusions, but if they were set,
// they need to be assigned to exclusions.
if cluster.MaintenancePolicy.Window != nil && cluster.MaintenancePolicy.Window.MaintenanceExclusions != nil {
exclusions = cluster.MaintenancePolicy.Window.MaintenanceExclusions
}
}

configured := d.Get("maintenance_policy")
Expand Down