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

Add NodeLocal DNSCache beta addon support #428

Closed
Dev25 opened this issue Feb 10, 2020 · 17 comments
Closed

Add NodeLocal DNSCache beta addon support #428

Dev25 opened this issue Feb 10, 2020 · 17 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request good first issue Good for newcomers P3 medium priority issues triaged Scoped and ready for work

Comments

@Dev25
Copy link
Contributor

Dev25 commented Feb 10, 2020

NodeLocal DNSCache was recently promoted to beta, add a flag to enable it for beta modules.

Blocked until beta provider supports it, looking at the GKE REST API this should just be a simple boolean flag

@morgante
Copy link
Contributor

Please make sure you open a provider issue as well.

@Dev25
Copy link
Contributor Author

Dev25 commented Feb 10, 2020

Existing Issue: hashicorp/terraform-provider-google#5150

@Dev25
Copy link
Contributor Author

Dev25 commented Mar 24, 2020

This is no longer blocked, 3.14 was released yesterday that includes a dns_cache_config field.

@morgante morgante added enhancement New feature or request good first issue Good for newcomers P3 medium priority issues triaged Scoped and ready for work labels Mar 24, 2020
@sebastianortizs4n
Copy link

This change always forces replacement of the cluster, even when is set to false and is also disabled on the cluster. This should not happen... Is the same configured value.

@morgante
Copy link
Contributor

This seems like a bug in the provider, but we could probably make it a dynamic block.

@sebastianortizs4n
Copy link

@morgante this is it, is solved already hashicorp/terraform-provider-google#6031

@sebastianortizs4n
Copy link

The solution use google-beta provider 3.17.0

@morgante
Copy link
Contributor

Just to confirm, it sounds like this is fixed if you upgrade to the latest provider version?

In that case I'm going to close this issue.

@jmymy
Copy link
Contributor

jmymy commented Apr 15, 2020

I am still seeing this behavior on an existing cluster with nodelocal cache disabled.

Terraform v0.12.24
+ provider.google v3.17.0
+ provider.google-beta v3.17.0

+ dns_cache_config { # forces replacement
             + enabled = false
           }

@morgante morgante reopened this Apr 15, 2020
@jmymy
Copy link
Contributor

jmymy commented Apr 15, 2020

according to the repo, the fix didnt make it in the v3.17.0 release
https://github.com/terraform-providers/terraform-provider-google-beta/blob/v3.17.0/google-beta/resource_container_cluster.go#L279

edit: commits to master after that made it into the release so I don't know what was missed there.

@sebastianortizs4n
Copy link

sebastianortizs4n commented Apr 15, 2020

Ohh man, sorry about that. What I did was enabled it through the gcloud web, changed the config to true, removed the cluster from the state and import it again.

edit: I tried this same before doing the upgrade to the beta provider and it didn't worked out. But did after the upgrade, so I assume the change was merged as you mentioned before because other chages to master made it.

@morgante
Copy link
Contributor

If someone does want to switch this in the module by updating to a dynamic block, I'm happy to review/merge.

@jmymy
Copy link
Contributor

jmymy commented Apr 17, 2020

I asked on the original PR and they said it’ll be fixed in the 3.18 release

@jmymy
Copy link
Contributor

jmymy commented Apr 21, 2020

@bharathkkb
Copy link
Member

@jmymy has this been resolved?
We may need to look applying this workaround to make it dynamic if it is still persisting.
#497 (comment)

@jmymy
Copy link
Contributor

jmymy commented Apr 29, 2020

is fixed. just tested and confirmed working.

@mdaslamansari
Copy link

Is it available for AKS as well? If not, any work arounds?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request good first issue Good for newcomers P3 medium priority issues triaged Scoped and ready for work
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants