terraform/internal/states/state_test.go

1009 lines
29 KiB
Go
Raw Normal View History

states: New package with modern models for Terraform state Our previous state models in the "terraform" package had a few limitations that are addressed here: - Instance attributes were stored as map[string]string with dot-separated keys representing traversals through a data structure. Now that we have a full type system, it's preferable to store it as a real data structure. - The existing state structures skipped over the "resource" concept and went straight to resource instance, requiring heuristics to decide whether a particular resource should appear as a single object or as a list of objects when used in configuration expressions. - Related to the previous point, the state models also used incorrect terminology where "ResourceState" was really a resource instance state and "InstanceState" was really the state of a particular remote object associated with an instance. These new models use the correct names for each of these, introducing the idea of a "ResourceInstanceObject" as the local record of a remote object associated with an instance. This is a first pass at fleshing out a new model for state. Undoubtedly there will be further iterations of this as we work on integrating these new models into the "terraform" package. These new model types no longer serve double-duty as a description of the JSON state file format, since they are for in-memory use only. A subsequent commit will introduce a separate package that deals with persisting state to files and reloading those files later.
2018-06-08 02:27:57 +02:00
package states
import (
"fmt"
"reflect"
states: New package with modern models for Terraform state Our previous state models in the "terraform" package had a few limitations that are addressed here: - Instance attributes were stored as map[string]string with dot-separated keys representing traversals through a data structure. Now that we have a full type system, it's preferable to store it as a real data structure. - The existing state structures skipped over the "resource" concept and went straight to resource instance, requiring heuristics to decide whether a particular resource should appear as a single object or as a list of objects when used in configuration expressions. - Related to the previous point, the state models also used incorrect terminology where "ResourceState" was really a resource instance state and "InstanceState" was really the state of a particular remote object associated with an instance. These new models use the correct names for each of these, introducing the idea of a "ResourceInstanceObject" as the local record of a remote object associated with an instance. This is a first pass at fleshing out a new model for state. Undoubtedly there will be further iterations of this as we work on integrating these new models into the "terraform" package. These new model types no longer serve double-duty as a description of the JSON state file format, since they are for in-memory use only. A subsequent commit will introduce a separate package that deals with persisting state to files and reloading those files later.
2018-06-08 02:27:57 +02:00
"testing"
"github.com/go-test/deep"
"github.com/zclconf/go-cty/cty"
"github.com/hashicorp/terraform/internal/addrs"
2021-06-24 23:53:43 +02:00
"github.com/hashicorp/terraform/internal/lang/marks"
states: New package with modern models for Terraform state Our previous state models in the "terraform" package had a few limitations that are addressed here: - Instance attributes were stored as map[string]string with dot-separated keys representing traversals through a data structure. Now that we have a full type system, it's preferable to store it as a real data structure. - The existing state structures skipped over the "resource" concept and went straight to resource instance, requiring heuristics to decide whether a particular resource should appear as a single object or as a list of objects when used in configuration expressions. - Related to the previous point, the state models also used incorrect terminology where "ResourceState" was really a resource instance state and "InstanceState" was really the state of a particular remote object associated with an instance. These new models use the correct names for each of these, introducing the idea of a "ResourceInstanceObject" as the local record of a remote object associated with an instance. This is a first pass at fleshing out a new model for state. Undoubtedly there will be further iterations of this as we work on integrating these new models into the "terraform" package. These new model types no longer serve double-duty as a description of the JSON state file format, since they are for in-memory use only. A subsequent commit will introduce a separate package that deals with persisting state to files and reloading those files later.
2018-06-08 02:27:57 +02:00
)
func TestState(t *testing.T) {
// This basic tests exercises the main mutation methods to construct
// a state. It is not fully comprehensive, so other tests should visit
// more esoteric codepaths.
state := NewState()
rootModule := state.RootModule()
if rootModule == nil {
t.Errorf("root module is nil; want valid object")
}
rootModule.SetLocalValue("foo", cty.StringVal("foo value"))
rootModule.SetOutputValue("bar", cty.StringVal("bar value"), false)
rootModule.SetOutputValue("secret", cty.StringVal("secret value"), true)
rootModule.SetResourceInstanceCurrent(
addrs.Resource{
Mode: addrs.ManagedResourceMode,
Type: "test_thing",
Name: "baz",
}.Instance(addrs.IntKey(0)),
&ResourceInstanceObjectSrc{
states: New package with modern models for Terraform state Our previous state models in the "terraform" package had a few limitations that are addressed here: - Instance attributes were stored as map[string]string with dot-separated keys representing traversals through a data structure. Now that we have a full type system, it's preferable to store it as a real data structure. - The existing state structures skipped over the "resource" concept and went straight to resource instance, requiring heuristics to decide whether a particular resource should appear as a single object or as a list of objects when used in configuration expressions. - Related to the previous point, the state models also used incorrect terminology where "ResourceState" was really a resource instance state and "InstanceState" was really the state of a particular remote object associated with an instance. These new models use the correct names for each of these, introducing the idea of a "ResourceInstanceObject" as the local record of a remote object associated with an instance. This is a first pass at fleshing out a new model for state. Undoubtedly there will be further iterations of this as we work on integrating these new models into the "terraform" package. These new model types no longer serve double-duty as a description of the JSON state file format, since they are for in-memory use only. A subsequent commit will introduce a separate package that deals with persisting state to files and reloading those files later.
2018-06-08 02:27:57 +02:00
Status: ObjectReady,
SchemaVersion: 1,
AttrsJSON: []byte(`{"woozles":"confuzles"}`),
},
addrs.AbsProviderConfig{
Provider: addrs.NewDefaultProvider("test"),
Module: addrs.RootModule,
},
states: New package with modern models for Terraform state Our previous state models in the "terraform" package had a few limitations that are addressed here: - Instance attributes were stored as map[string]string with dot-separated keys representing traversals through a data structure. Now that we have a full type system, it's preferable to store it as a real data structure. - The existing state structures skipped over the "resource" concept and went straight to resource instance, requiring heuristics to decide whether a particular resource should appear as a single object or as a list of objects when used in configuration expressions. - Related to the previous point, the state models also used incorrect terminology where "ResourceState" was really a resource instance state and "InstanceState" was really the state of a particular remote object associated with an instance. These new models use the correct names for each of these, introducing the idea of a "ResourceInstanceObject" as the local record of a remote object associated with an instance. This is a first pass at fleshing out a new model for state. Undoubtedly there will be further iterations of this as we work on integrating these new models into the "terraform" package. These new model types no longer serve double-duty as a description of the JSON state file format, since they are for in-memory use only. A subsequent commit will introduce a separate package that deals with persisting state to files and reloading those files later.
2018-06-08 02:27:57 +02:00
)
childModule := state.EnsureModule(addrs.RootModuleInstance.Child("child", addrs.NoKey))
childModule.SetOutputValue("pizza", cty.StringVal("hawaiian"), false)
multiModA := state.EnsureModule(addrs.RootModuleInstance.Child("multi", addrs.StringKey("a")))
multiModA.SetOutputValue("pizza", cty.StringVal("cheese"), false)
multiModB := state.EnsureModule(addrs.RootModuleInstance.Child("multi", addrs.StringKey("b")))
multiModB.SetOutputValue("pizza", cty.StringVal("sausage"), false)
states: New package with modern models for Terraform state Our previous state models in the "terraform" package had a few limitations that are addressed here: - Instance attributes were stored as map[string]string with dot-separated keys representing traversals through a data structure. Now that we have a full type system, it's preferable to store it as a real data structure. - The existing state structures skipped over the "resource" concept and went straight to resource instance, requiring heuristics to decide whether a particular resource should appear as a single object or as a list of objects when used in configuration expressions. - Related to the previous point, the state models also used incorrect terminology where "ResourceState" was really a resource instance state and "InstanceState" was really the state of a particular remote object associated with an instance. These new models use the correct names for each of these, introducing the idea of a "ResourceInstanceObject" as the local record of a remote object associated with an instance. This is a first pass at fleshing out a new model for state. Undoubtedly there will be further iterations of this as we work on integrating these new models into the "terraform" package. These new model types no longer serve double-duty as a description of the JSON state file format, since they are for in-memory use only. A subsequent commit will introduce a separate package that deals with persisting state to files and reloading those files later.
2018-06-08 02:27:57 +02:00
want := &State{
Modules: map[string]*Module{
"": {
Addr: addrs.RootModuleInstance,
LocalValues: map[string]cty.Value{
"foo": cty.StringVal("foo value"),
},
OutputValues: map[string]*OutputValue{
"bar": {
Addr: addrs.AbsOutputValue{
OutputValue: addrs.OutputValue{
Name: "bar",
},
},
states: New package with modern models for Terraform state Our previous state models in the "terraform" package had a few limitations that are addressed here: - Instance attributes were stored as map[string]string with dot-separated keys representing traversals through a data structure. Now that we have a full type system, it's preferable to store it as a real data structure. - The existing state structures skipped over the "resource" concept and went straight to resource instance, requiring heuristics to decide whether a particular resource should appear as a single object or as a list of objects when used in configuration expressions. - Related to the previous point, the state models also used incorrect terminology where "ResourceState" was really a resource instance state and "InstanceState" was really the state of a particular remote object associated with an instance. These new models use the correct names for each of these, introducing the idea of a "ResourceInstanceObject" as the local record of a remote object associated with an instance. This is a first pass at fleshing out a new model for state. Undoubtedly there will be further iterations of this as we work on integrating these new models into the "terraform" package. These new model types no longer serve double-duty as a description of the JSON state file format, since they are for in-memory use only. A subsequent commit will introduce a separate package that deals with persisting state to files and reloading those files later.
2018-06-08 02:27:57 +02:00
Value: cty.StringVal("bar value"),
Sensitive: false,
},
"secret": {
Addr: addrs.AbsOutputValue{
OutputValue: addrs.OutputValue{
Name: "secret",
},
},
states: New package with modern models for Terraform state Our previous state models in the "terraform" package had a few limitations that are addressed here: - Instance attributes were stored as map[string]string with dot-separated keys representing traversals through a data structure. Now that we have a full type system, it's preferable to store it as a real data structure. - The existing state structures skipped over the "resource" concept and went straight to resource instance, requiring heuristics to decide whether a particular resource should appear as a single object or as a list of objects when used in configuration expressions. - Related to the previous point, the state models also used incorrect terminology where "ResourceState" was really a resource instance state and "InstanceState" was really the state of a particular remote object associated with an instance. These new models use the correct names for each of these, introducing the idea of a "ResourceInstanceObject" as the local record of a remote object associated with an instance. This is a first pass at fleshing out a new model for state. Undoubtedly there will be further iterations of this as we work on integrating these new models into the "terraform" package. These new model types no longer serve double-duty as a description of the JSON state file format, since they are for in-memory use only. A subsequent commit will introduce a separate package that deals with persisting state to files and reloading those files later.
2018-06-08 02:27:57 +02:00
Value: cty.StringVal("secret value"),
Sensitive: true,
},
},
Resources: map[string]*Resource{
"test_thing.baz": {
Addr: addrs.Resource{
Mode: addrs.ManagedResourceMode,
Type: "test_thing",
Name: "baz",
}.Absolute(addrs.RootModuleInstance),
states: New package with modern models for Terraform state Our previous state models in the "terraform" package had a few limitations that are addressed here: - Instance attributes were stored as map[string]string with dot-separated keys representing traversals through a data structure. Now that we have a full type system, it's preferable to store it as a real data structure. - The existing state structures skipped over the "resource" concept and went straight to resource instance, requiring heuristics to decide whether a particular resource should appear as a single object or as a list of objects when used in configuration expressions. - Related to the previous point, the state models also used incorrect terminology where "ResourceState" was really a resource instance state and "InstanceState" was really the state of a particular remote object associated with an instance. These new models use the correct names for each of these, introducing the idea of a "ResourceInstanceObject" as the local record of a remote object associated with an instance. This is a first pass at fleshing out a new model for state. Undoubtedly there will be further iterations of this as we work on integrating these new models into the "terraform" package. These new model types no longer serve double-duty as a description of the JSON state file format, since they are for in-memory use only. A subsequent commit will introduce a separate package that deals with persisting state to files and reloading those files later.
2018-06-08 02:27:57 +02:00
Instances: map[addrs.InstanceKey]*ResourceInstance{
addrs.IntKey(0): {
Current: &ResourceInstanceObjectSrc{
states: New package with modern models for Terraform state Our previous state models in the "terraform" package had a few limitations that are addressed here: - Instance attributes were stored as map[string]string with dot-separated keys representing traversals through a data structure. Now that we have a full type system, it's preferable to store it as a real data structure. - The existing state structures skipped over the "resource" concept and went straight to resource instance, requiring heuristics to decide whether a particular resource should appear as a single object or as a list of objects when used in configuration expressions. - Related to the previous point, the state models also used incorrect terminology where "ResourceState" was really a resource instance state and "InstanceState" was really the state of a particular remote object associated with an instance. These new models use the correct names for each of these, introducing the idea of a "ResourceInstanceObject" as the local record of a remote object associated with an instance. This is a first pass at fleshing out a new model for state. Undoubtedly there will be further iterations of this as we work on integrating these new models into the "terraform" package. These new model types no longer serve double-duty as a description of the JSON state file format, since they are for in-memory use only. A subsequent commit will introduce a separate package that deals with persisting state to files and reloading those files later.
2018-06-08 02:27:57 +02:00
SchemaVersion: 1,
Status: ObjectReady,
AttrsJSON: []byte(`{"woozles":"confuzles"}`),
},
Deposed: map[DeposedKey]*ResourceInstanceObjectSrc{},
states: New package with modern models for Terraform state Our previous state models in the "terraform" package had a few limitations that are addressed here: - Instance attributes were stored as map[string]string with dot-separated keys representing traversals through a data structure. Now that we have a full type system, it's preferable to store it as a real data structure. - The existing state structures skipped over the "resource" concept and went straight to resource instance, requiring heuristics to decide whether a particular resource should appear as a single object or as a list of objects when used in configuration expressions. - Related to the previous point, the state models also used incorrect terminology where "ResourceState" was really a resource instance state and "InstanceState" was really the state of a particular remote object associated with an instance. These new models use the correct names for each of these, introducing the idea of a "ResourceInstanceObject" as the local record of a remote object associated with an instance. This is a first pass at fleshing out a new model for state. Undoubtedly there will be further iterations of this as we work on integrating these new models into the "terraform" package. These new model types no longer serve double-duty as a description of the JSON state file format, since they are for in-memory use only. A subsequent commit will introduce a separate package that deals with persisting state to files and reloading those files later.
2018-06-08 02:27:57 +02:00
},
},
ProviderConfig: addrs.AbsProviderConfig{
Provider: addrs.NewDefaultProvider("test"),
Module: addrs.RootModule,
},
states: New package with modern models for Terraform state Our previous state models in the "terraform" package had a few limitations that are addressed here: - Instance attributes were stored as map[string]string with dot-separated keys representing traversals through a data structure. Now that we have a full type system, it's preferable to store it as a real data structure. - The existing state structures skipped over the "resource" concept and went straight to resource instance, requiring heuristics to decide whether a particular resource should appear as a single object or as a list of objects when used in configuration expressions. - Related to the previous point, the state models also used incorrect terminology where "ResourceState" was really a resource instance state and "InstanceState" was really the state of a particular remote object associated with an instance. These new models use the correct names for each of these, introducing the idea of a "ResourceInstanceObject" as the local record of a remote object associated with an instance. This is a first pass at fleshing out a new model for state. Undoubtedly there will be further iterations of this as we work on integrating these new models into the "terraform" package. These new model types no longer serve double-duty as a description of the JSON state file format, since they are for in-memory use only. A subsequent commit will introduce a separate package that deals with persisting state to files and reloading those files later.
2018-06-08 02:27:57 +02:00
},
},
},
"module.child": {
Addr: addrs.RootModuleInstance.Child("child", addrs.NoKey),
LocalValues: map[string]cty.Value{},
OutputValues: map[string]*OutputValue{
"pizza": {
Addr: addrs.AbsOutputValue{
Module: addrs.RootModuleInstance.Child("child", addrs.NoKey),
OutputValue: addrs.OutputValue{
Name: "pizza",
},
},
states: New package with modern models for Terraform state Our previous state models in the "terraform" package had a few limitations that are addressed here: - Instance attributes were stored as map[string]string with dot-separated keys representing traversals through a data structure. Now that we have a full type system, it's preferable to store it as a real data structure. - The existing state structures skipped over the "resource" concept and went straight to resource instance, requiring heuristics to decide whether a particular resource should appear as a single object or as a list of objects when used in configuration expressions. - Related to the previous point, the state models also used incorrect terminology where "ResourceState" was really a resource instance state and "InstanceState" was really the state of a particular remote object associated with an instance. These new models use the correct names for each of these, introducing the idea of a "ResourceInstanceObject" as the local record of a remote object associated with an instance. This is a first pass at fleshing out a new model for state. Undoubtedly there will be further iterations of this as we work on integrating these new models into the "terraform" package. These new model types no longer serve double-duty as a description of the JSON state file format, since they are for in-memory use only. A subsequent commit will introduce a separate package that deals with persisting state to files and reloading those files later.
2018-06-08 02:27:57 +02:00
Value: cty.StringVal("hawaiian"),
Sensitive: false,
},
},
Resources: map[string]*Resource{},
},
`module.multi["a"]`: {
Addr: addrs.RootModuleInstance.Child("multi", addrs.StringKey("a")),
LocalValues: map[string]cty.Value{},
OutputValues: map[string]*OutputValue{
"pizza": {
Addr: addrs.AbsOutputValue{
Module: addrs.RootModuleInstance.Child("multi", addrs.StringKey("a")),
OutputValue: addrs.OutputValue{
Name: "pizza",
},
},
Value: cty.StringVal("cheese"),
Sensitive: false,
},
},
Resources: map[string]*Resource{},
},
`module.multi["b"]`: {
Addr: addrs.RootModuleInstance.Child("multi", addrs.StringKey("b")),
LocalValues: map[string]cty.Value{},
OutputValues: map[string]*OutputValue{
"pizza": {
Addr: addrs.AbsOutputValue{
Module: addrs.RootModuleInstance.Child("multi", addrs.StringKey("b")),
OutputValue: addrs.OutputValue{
Name: "pizza",
},
},
Value: cty.StringVal("sausage"),
Sensitive: false,
},
},
Resources: map[string]*Resource{},
},
states: New package with modern models for Terraform state Our previous state models in the "terraform" package had a few limitations that are addressed here: - Instance attributes were stored as map[string]string with dot-separated keys representing traversals through a data structure. Now that we have a full type system, it's preferable to store it as a real data structure. - The existing state structures skipped over the "resource" concept and went straight to resource instance, requiring heuristics to decide whether a particular resource should appear as a single object or as a list of objects when used in configuration expressions. - Related to the previous point, the state models also used incorrect terminology where "ResourceState" was really a resource instance state and "InstanceState" was really the state of a particular remote object associated with an instance. These new models use the correct names for each of these, introducing the idea of a "ResourceInstanceObject" as the local record of a remote object associated with an instance. This is a first pass at fleshing out a new model for state. Undoubtedly there will be further iterations of this as we work on integrating these new models into the "terraform" package. These new model types no longer serve double-duty as a description of the JSON state file format, since they are for in-memory use only. A subsequent commit will introduce a separate package that deals with persisting state to files and reloading those files later.
2018-06-08 02:27:57 +02:00
},
}
{
// Our structure goes deep, so we need to temporarily override the
// deep package settings to ensure that we visit the full structure.
oldDeepDepth := deep.MaxDepth
oldDeepCompareUnexp := deep.CompareUnexportedFields
deep.MaxDepth = 50
deep.CompareUnexportedFields = true
defer func() {
deep.MaxDepth = oldDeepDepth
deep.CompareUnexportedFields = oldDeepCompareUnexp
}()
}
for _, problem := range deep.Equal(state, want) {
t.Error(problem)
}
expectedOutputs := map[string]string{
`module.multi["a"].output.pizza`: "cheese",
`module.multi["b"].output.pizza`: "sausage",
}
for _, o := range state.ModuleOutputs(addrs.RootModuleInstance, addrs.ModuleCall{Name: "multi"}) {
addr := o.Addr.String()
expected := expectedOutputs[addr]
delete(expectedOutputs, addr)
if expected != o.Value.AsString() {
t.Fatalf("expected %q:%q, got %q", addr, expected, o.Value.AsString())
}
}
for addr, o := range expectedOutputs {
t.Fatalf("missing output %q:%q", addr, o)
}
states: New package with modern models for Terraform state Our previous state models in the "terraform" package had a few limitations that are addressed here: - Instance attributes were stored as map[string]string with dot-separated keys representing traversals through a data structure. Now that we have a full type system, it's preferable to store it as a real data structure. - The existing state structures skipped over the "resource" concept and went straight to resource instance, requiring heuristics to decide whether a particular resource should appear as a single object or as a list of objects when used in configuration expressions. - Related to the previous point, the state models also used incorrect terminology where "ResourceState" was really a resource instance state and "InstanceState" was really the state of a particular remote object associated with an instance. These new models use the correct names for each of these, introducing the idea of a "ResourceInstanceObject" as the local record of a remote object associated with an instance. This is a first pass at fleshing out a new model for state. Undoubtedly there will be further iterations of this as we work on integrating these new models into the "terraform" package. These new model types no longer serve double-duty as a description of the JSON state file format, since they are for in-memory use only. A subsequent commit will introduce a separate package that deals with persisting state to files and reloading those files later.
2018-06-08 02:27:57 +02:00
}
func TestStateDeepCopyObject(t *testing.T) {
obj := &ResourceInstanceObject{
Value: cty.ObjectVal(map[string]cty.Value{
"id": cty.StringVal("id"),
}),
Private: []byte("private"),
Status: ObjectReady,
Dependencies: []addrs.ConfigResource{
{
Module: addrs.RootModule,
Resource: addrs.Resource{
Mode: addrs.ManagedResourceMode,
Type: "test_instance",
Name: "bar",
},
},
},
CreateBeforeDestroy: true,
}
objCopy := obj.DeepCopy()
if !reflect.DeepEqual(obj, objCopy) {
t.Fatalf("not equal\n%#v\n%#v", obj, objCopy)
}
}
func TestStateDeepCopy(t *testing.T) {
state := NewState()
rootModule := state.RootModule()
if rootModule == nil {
t.Errorf("root module is nil; want valid object")
}
rootModule.SetLocalValue("foo", cty.StringVal("foo value"))
rootModule.SetOutputValue("bar", cty.StringVal("bar value"), false)
rootModule.SetOutputValue("secret", cty.StringVal("secret value"), true)
rootModule.SetResourceInstanceCurrent(
addrs.Resource{
Mode: addrs.ManagedResourceMode,
Type: "test_thing",
Name: "baz",
}.Instance(addrs.IntKey(0)),
&ResourceInstanceObjectSrc{
Status: ObjectReady,
SchemaVersion: 1,
AttrsJSON: []byte(`{"woozles":"confuzles"}`),
Private: []byte("private data"),
Dependencies: []addrs.ConfigResource{},
CreateBeforeDestroy: true,
},
addrs.AbsProviderConfig{
Provider: addrs.NewDefaultProvider("test"),
Module: addrs.RootModule,
},
)
rootModule.SetResourceInstanceCurrent(
addrs.Resource{
Mode: addrs.ManagedResourceMode,
Type: "test_thing",
Name: "bar",
}.Instance(addrs.IntKey(0)),
&ResourceInstanceObjectSrc{
Status: ObjectReady,
SchemaVersion: 1,
AttrsJSON: []byte(`{"woozles":"confuzles"}`),
Store sensitive attribute paths in state (#26338) * Add creation test and simplify in-place test * Add deletion test * Start adding marking from state Start storing paths that should be marked when pulled out of state. Implements deep copy for attr paths. This commit also includes some comment noise from investigations, and fixing the diff test * Fix apply stripping marks * Expand diff tests * Basic apply test * Update comments on equality checks to clarify current understanding * Add JSON serialization for sensitive paths We need to serialize a slice of cty.Path values to be used to re-mark the sensitive values of a resource instance when loading the state file. Paths consist of a list of steps, each of which may be either getting an attribute value by name, or indexing into a collection by string or number. To serialize these without building a complex parser for a compact string form, we render a nested array of small objects, like so: [ [ { type: "get_attr", value: "foo" }, { type: "index", value: { "type": "number", "value": 2 } } ] ] The above example is equivalent to a path `foo[2]`. * Format diffs with map types Comparisons need unmarked values to operate on, so create unmarked values for those operations. Additionally, change diff to cover map types * Remove debugging printing * Fix bug with marking non-sensitive values When pulling a sensitive value from state, we were previously using those marks to remark the planned new value, but that new value might *not* be sensitive, so let's not do that * Fix apply test Apply was not passing the second state through to the third pass at apply * Consistency in checking for length of paths vs inspecting into value * In apply, don't mark with before paths * AttrPaths test coverage for DeepCopy * Revert format changes Reverts format changes in format/diff for this branch so those changes can be discussed on a separate PR * Refactor name of AttrPaths to AttrSensitivePaths * Rename AttributePaths/attributePaths for naming consistency Co-authored-by: Alisdair McDiarmid <alisdair@users.noreply.github.com>
2020-09-24 18:40:17 +02:00
// Sensitive path at "woozles"
AttrSensitivePaths: []cty.PathValueMarks{
{
Path: cty.Path{cty.GetAttrStep{Name: "woozles"}},
2021-06-24 23:53:43 +02:00
Marks: cty.NewValueMarks(marks.Sensitive),
Store sensitive attribute paths in state (#26338) * Add creation test and simplify in-place test * Add deletion test * Start adding marking from state Start storing paths that should be marked when pulled out of state. Implements deep copy for attr paths. This commit also includes some comment noise from investigations, and fixing the diff test * Fix apply stripping marks * Expand diff tests * Basic apply test * Update comments on equality checks to clarify current understanding * Add JSON serialization for sensitive paths We need to serialize a slice of cty.Path values to be used to re-mark the sensitive values of a resource instance when loading the state file. Paths consist of a list of steps, each of which may be either getting an attribute value by name, or indexing into a collection by string or number. To serialize these without building a complex parser for a compact string form, we render a nested array of small objects, like so: [ [ { type: "get_attr", value: "foo" }, { type: "index", value: { "type": "number", "value": 2 } } ] ] The above example is equivalent to a path `foo[2]`. * Format diffs with map types Comparisons need unmarked values to operate on, so create unmarked values for those operations. Additionally, change diff to cover map types * Remove debugging printing * Fix bug with marking non-sensitive values When pulling a sensitive value from state, we were previously using those marks to remark the planned new value, but that new value might *not* be sensitive, so let's not do that * Fix apply test Apply was not passing the second state through to the third pass at apply * Consistency in checking for length of paths vs inspecting into value * In apply, don't mark with before paths * AttrPaths test coverage for DeepCopy * Revert format changes Reverts format changes in format/diff for this branch so those changes can be discussed on a separate PR * Refactor name of AttrPaths to AttrSensitivePaths * Rename AttributePaths/attributePaths for naming consistency Co-authored-by: Alisdair McDiarmid <alisdair@users.noreply.github.com>
2020-09-24 18:40:17 +02:00
},
},
Private: []byte("private data"),
Dependencies: []addrs.ConfigResource{
{
Module: addrs.RootModule,
Resource: addrs.Resource{
Mode: addrs.ManagedResourceMode,
Type: "test_thing",
Name: "baz",
},
},
},
},
addrs.AbsProviderConfig{
Provider: addrs.NewDefaultProvider("test"),
Module: addrs.RootModule,
},
)
childModule := state.EnsureModule(addrs.RootModuleInstance.Child("child", addrs.NoKey))
childModule.SetOutputValue("pizza", cty.StringVal("hawaiian"), false)
stateCopy := state.DeepCopy()
if !state.Equal(stateCopy) {
t.Fatalf("\nexpected:\n%q\ngot:\n%q\n", state, stateCopy)
}
}
func TestStateHasResourceInstanceObjects(t *testing.T) {
providerConfig := addrs.AbsProviderConfig{
Module: addrs.RootModule,
Provider: addrs.MustParseProviderSourceString("test/test"),
}
childModuleProviderConfig := addrs.AbsProviderConfig{
Module: addrs.RootModule.Child("child"),
Provider: addrs.MustParseProviderSourceString("test/test"),
}
tests := map[string]struct {
Setup func(ss *SyncState)
Want bool
}{
"empty": {
func(ss *SyncState) {},
false,
},
"one current, ready object in root module": {
func(ss *SyncState) {
ss.SetResourceInstanceCurrent(
mustAbsResourceAddr("test.foo").Instance(addrs.NoKey),
&ResourceInstanceObjectSrc{
AttrsJSON: []byte(`{}`),
Status: ObjectReady,
},
providerConfig,
)
},
true,
},
"one current, ready object in child module": {
func(ss *SyncState) {
ss.SetResourceInstanceCurrent(
mustAbsResourceAddr("module.child.test.foo").Instance(addrs.NoKey),
&ResourceInstanceObjectSrc{
AttrsJSON: []byte(`{}`),
Status: ObjectReady,
},
childModuleProviderConfig,
)
},
true,
},
"one current, tainted object in root module": {
func(ss *SyncState) {
ss.SetResourceInstanceCurrent(
mustAbsResourceAddr("test.foo").Instance(addrs.NoKey),
&ResourceInstanceObjectSrc{
AttrsJSON: []byte(`{}`),
Status: ObjectTainted,
},
providerConfig,
)
},
true,
},
"one deposed, ready object in root module": {
func(ss *SyncState) {
ss.SetResourceInstanceDeposed(
mustAbsResourceAddr("test.foo").Instance(addrs.NoKey),
DeposedKey("uhoh"),
&ResourceInstanceObjectSrc{
AttrsJSON: []byte(`{}`),
Status: ObjectTainted,
},
providerConfig,
)
},
true,
},
"one empty resource husk in root module": {
func(ss *SyncState) {
// Current Terraform doesn't actually create resource husks
// as part of its everyday work, so this is a "should never
// happen" case but we'll test to make sure we're robust to
// it anyway, because this was a historical bug blocking
// "terraform workspace delete" and similar.
ss.SetResourceInstanceCurrent(
mustAbsResourceAddr("test.foo").Instance(addrs.NoKey),
&ResourceInstanceObjectSrc{
AttrsJSON: []byte(`{}`),
Status: ObjectTainted,
},
providerConfig,
)
s := ss.Lock()
delete(s.Modules[""].Resources["test.foo"].Instances, addrs.NoKey)
ss.Unlock()
},
false,
},
"one current data resource object in root module": {
func(ss *SyncState) {
ss.SetResourceInstanceCurrent(
mustAbsResourceAddr("data.test.foo").Instance(addrs.NoKey),
&ResourceInstanceObjectSrc{
AttrsJSON: []byte(`{}`),
Status: ObjectReady,
},
providerConfig,
)
},
false, // data resources aren't managed resources, so they don't count
},
}
for name, test := range tests {
t.Run(name, func(t *testing.T) {
state := BuildState(test.Setup)
got := state.HasManagedResourceInstanceObjects()
if got != test.Want {
t.Errorf("wrong result\nstate content: (using legacy state string format; might not be comprehensive)\n%s\n\ngot: %t\nwant: %t", state, got, test.Want)
}
})
}
}
func TestState_MoveAbsResource(t *testing.T) {
// Set up a starter state for the embedded tests, which should start from a copy of this state.
state := NewState()
rootModule := state.RootModule()
rootModule.SetResourceInstanceCurrent(
addrs.Resource{
Mode: addrs.ManagedResourceMode,
Type: "test_thing",
Name: "foo",
}.Instance(addrs.IntKey(0)),
&ResourceInstanceObjectSrc{
Status: ObjectReady,
SchemaVersion: 1,
AttrsJSON: []byte(`{"woozles":"confuzles"}`),
},
addrs.AbsProviderConfig{
Provider: addrs.NewDefaultProvider("test"),
Module: addrs.RootModule,
},
)
src := addrs.Resource{Mode: addrs.ManagedResourceMode, Type: "test_thing", Name: "foo"}.Absolute(addrs.RootModuleInstance)
t.Run("basic move", func(t *testing.T) {
s := state.DeepCopy()
dst := addrs.Resource{Mode: addrs.ManagedResourceMode, Type: "test_thing", Name: "bar"}.Absolute(addrs.RootModuleInstance)
s.MoveAbsResource(src, dst)
if s.Empty() {
t.Fatal("unexpected empty state")
}
if len(s.RootModule().Resources) != 1 {
t.Fatalf("wrong number of resources in state; expected 1, found %d", len(state.RootModule().Resources))
}
got := s.Resource(dst)
if got.Addr.Resource != dst.Resource {
t.Fatalf("dst resource not in state")
}
})
t.Run("move to new module", func(t *testing.T) {
s := state.DeepCopy()
dstModule := addrs.RootModuleInstance.Child("kinder", addrs.StringKey("one"))
dst := addrs.Resource{Mode: addrs.ManagedResourceMode, Type: "test_thing", Name: "bar"}.Absolute(dstModule)
s.MoveAbsResource(src, dst)
if s.Empty() {
t.Fatal("unexpected empty state")
}
if s.Module(dstModule) == nil {
t.Fatalf("child module %s not in state", dstModule.String())
}
if len(s.Module(dstModule).Resources) != 1 {
t.Fatalf("wrong number of resources in state; expected 1, found %d", len(s.Module(dstModule).Resources))
}
got := s.Resource(dst)
if got.Addr.Resource != dst.Resource {
t.Fatalf("dst resource not in state")
}
})
t.Run("from a child module to root", func(t *testing.T) {
s := state.DeepCopy()
srcModule := addrs.RootModuleInstance.Child("kinder", addrs.NoKey)
cm := s.EnsureModule(srcModule)
cm.SetResourceInstanceCurrent(
addrs.Resource{
Mode: addrs.ManagedResourceMode,
Type: "test_thing",
Name: "child",
}.Instance(addrs.IntKey(0)), // Moving the AbsResouce moves all instances
&ResourceInstanceObjectSrc{
Status: ObjectReady,
SchemaVersion: 1,
AttrsJSON: []byte(`{"woozles":"confuzles"}`),
},
addrs.AbsProviderConfig{
Provider: addrs.NewDefaultProvider("test"),
Module: addrs.RootModule,
},
)
cm.SetResourceInstanceCurrent(
addrs.Resource{
Mode: addrs.ManagedResourceMode,
Type: "test_thing",
Name: "child",
}.Instance(addrs.IntKey(1)), // Moving the AbsResouce moves all instances
&ResourceInstanceObjectSrc{
Status: ObjectReady,
SchemaVersion: 1,
AttrsJSON: []byte(`{"woozles":"confuzles"}`),
},
addrs.AbsProviderConfig{
Provider: addrs.NewDefaultProvider("test"),
Module: addrs.RootModule,
},
)
src := addrs.Resource{Mode: addrs.ManagedResourceMode, Type: "test_thing", Name: "child"}.Absolute(srcModule)
dst := addrs.Resource{Mode: addrs.ManagedResourceMode, Type: "test_thing", Name: "child"}.Absolute(addrs.RootModuleInstance)
s.MoveAbsResource(src, dst)
if s.Empty() {
t.Fatal("unexpected empty state")
}
// The child module should have been removed after removing its only resource
if s.Module(srcModule) != nil {
t.Fatalf("child module %s was not removed from state after mv", srcModule.String())
}
if len(s.RootModule().Resources) != 2 {
t.Fatalf("wrong number of resources in state; expected 2, found %d", len(s.RootModule().Resources))
}
if len(s.Resource(dst).Instances) != 2 {
t.Fatalf("wrong number of resource instances for dst, got %d expected 2", len(s.Resource(dst).Instances))
}
got := s.Resource(dst)
if got.Addr.Resource != dst.Resource {
t.Fatalf("dst resource not in state")
}
})
t.Run("module to new module", func(t *testing.T) {
s := NewState()
srcModule := addrs.RootModuleInstance.Child("kinder", addrs.StringKey("exists"))
dstModule := addrs.RootModuleInstance.Child("kinder", addrs.StringKey("new"))
cm := s.EnsureModule(srcModule)
cm.SetResourceInstanceCurrent(
addrs.Resource{
Mode: addrs.ManagedResourceMode,
Type: "test_thing",
Name: "child",
}.Instance(addrs.NoKey),
&ResourceInstanceObjectSrc{
Status: ObjectReady,
SchemaVersion: 1,
AttrsJSON: []byte(`{"woozles":"confuzles"}`),
},
addrs.AbsProviderConfig{
Provider: addrs.NewDefaultProvider("test"),
Module: addrs.RootModule,
},
)
src := addrs.Resource{Mode: addrs.ManagedResourceMode, Type: "test_thing", Name: "child"}.Absolute(srcModule)
dst := addrs.Resource{Mode: addrs.ManagedResourceMode, Type: "test_thing", Name: "child"}.Absolute(dstModule)
s.MoveAbsResource(src, dst)
if s.Empty() {
t.Fatal("unexpected empty state")
}
// The child module should have been removed after removing its only resource
if s.Module(srcModule) != nil {
t.Fatalf("child module %s was not removed from state after mv", srcModule.String())
}
gotMod := s.Module(dstModule)
if len(gotMod.Resources) != 1 {
t.Fatalf("wrong number of resources in state; expected 1, found %d", len(gotMod.Resources))
}
got := s.Resource(dst)
if got.Addr.Resource != dst.Resource {
t.Fatalf("dst resource not in state")
}
})
t.Run("module to new module", func(t *testing.T) {
s := NewState()
srcModule := addrs.RootModuleInstance.Child("kinder", addrs.StringKey("exists"))
dstModule := addrs.RootModuleInstance.Child("kinder", addrs.StringKey("new"))
cm := s.EnsureModule(srcModule)
cm.SetResourceInstanceCurrent(
addrs.Resource{
Mode: addrs.ManagedResourceMode,
Type: "test_thing",
Name: "child",
}.Instance(addrs.NoKey),
&ResourceInstanceObjectSrc{
Status: ObjectReady,
SchemaVersion: 1,
AttrsJSON: []byte(`{"woozles":"confuzles"}`),
},
addrs.AbsProviderConfig{
Provider: addrs.NewDefaultProvider("test"),
Module: addrs.RootModule,
},
)
src := addrs.Resource{Mode: addrs.ManagedResourceMode, Type: "test_thing", Name: "child"}.Absolute(srcModule)
dst := addrs.Resource{Mode: addrs.ManagedResourceMode, Type: "test_thing", Name: "child"}.Absolute(dstModule)
s.MoveAbsResource(src, dst)
if s.Empty() {
t.Fatal("unexpected empty state")
}
// The child module should have been removed after removing its only resource
if s.Module(srcModule) != nil {
t.Fatalf("child module %s was not removed from state after mv", srcModule.String())
}
gotMod := s.Module(dstModule)
if len(gotMod.Resources) != 1 {
t.Fatalf("wrong number of resources in state; expected 1, found %d", len(gotMod.Resources))
}
got := s.Resource(dst)
if got.Addr.Resource != dst.Resource {
t.Fatalf("dst resource not in state")
}
})
}
func TestState_MaybeMoveAbsResource(t *testing.T) {
state := NewState()
rootModule := state.RootModule()
rootModule.SetResourceInstanceCurrent(
addrs.Resource{
Mode: addrs.ManagedResourceMode,
Type: "test_thing",
Name: "foo",
}.Instance(addrs.IntKey(0)),
&ResourceInstanceObjectSrc{
Status: ObjectReady,
SchemaVersion: 1,
AttrsJSON: []byte(`{"woozles":"confuzles"}`),
},
addrs.AbsProviderConfig{
Provider: addrs.NewDefaultProvider("test"),
Module: addrs.RootModule,
},
)
src := addrs.Resource{Mode: addrs.ManagedResourceMode, Type: "test_thing", Name: "foo"}.Absolute(addrs.RootModuleInstance)
dst := addrs.Resource{Mode: addrs.ManagedResourceMode, Type: "test_thing", Name: "bar"}.Absolute(addrs.RootModuleInstance)
// First move, success
t.Run("first move", func(t *testing.T) {
moved := state.MaybeMoveAbsResource(src, dst)
if !moved {
t.Fatal("wrong result")
}
})
// Trying to move a resource that doesn't exist in state to a resource which does exist should be a noop.
t.Run("noop", func(t *testing.T) {
moved := state.MaybeMoveAbsResource(src, dst)
if moved {
t.Fatal("wrong result")
}
})
}
func TestState_MoveAbsResourceInstance(t *testing.T) {
state := NewState()
rootModule := state.RootModule()
rootModule.SetResourceInstanceCurrent(
addrs.Resource{
Mode: addrs.ManagedResourceMode,
Type: "test_thing",
Name: "foo",
}.Instance(addrs.NoKey),
&ResourceInstanceObjectSrc{
Status: ObjectReady,
SchemaVersion: 1,
AttrsJSON: []byte(`{"woozles":"confuzles"}`),
},
addrs.AbsProviderConfig{
Provider: addrs.NewDefaultProvider("test"),
Module: addrs.RootModule,
},
)
// src resource from the state above
src := addrs.Resource{Mode: addrs.ManagedResourceMode, Type: "test_thing", Name: "foo"}.Instance(addrs.NoKey).Absolute(addrs.RootModuleInstance)
t.Run("resource to resource instance", func(t *testing.T) {
s := state.DeepCopy()
// For a little extra fun, move a resource to a resource instance: test_thing.foo to test_thing.foo[1]
dst := addrs.Resource{Mode: addrs.ManagedResourceMode, Type: "test_thing", Name: "foo"}.Instance(addrs.IntKey(1)).Absolute(addrs.RootModuleInstance)
s.MoveAbsResourceInstance(src, dst)
if s.Empty() {
t.Fatal("unexpected empty state")
}
if len(s.RootModule().Resources) != 1 {
t.Fatalf("wrong number of resources in state; expected 1, found %d", len(state.RootModule().Resources))
}
got := s.ResourceInstance(dst)
if got == nil {
t.Fatalf("dst resource not in state")
}
})
t.Run("move to new module", func(t *testing.T) {
s := state.DeepCopy()
// test_thing.foo to module.kinder.test_thing.foo["baz"]
dstModule := addrs.RootModuleInstance.Child("kinder", addrs.NoKey)
dst := addrs.Resource{Mode: addrs.ManagedResourceMode, Type: "test_thing", Name: "foo"}.Instance(addrs.IntKey(1)).Absolute(dstModule)
s.MoveAbsResourceInstance(src, dst)
if s.Empty() {
t.Fatal("unexpected empty state")
}
if s.Module(dstModule) == nil {
t.Fatalf("child module %s not in state", dstModule.String())
}
if len(s.Module(dstModule).Resources) != 1 {
t.Fatalf("wrong number of resources in state; expected 1, found %d", len(s.Module(dstModule).Resources))
}
got := s.ResourceInstance(dst)
if got == nil {
t.Fatalf("dst resource not in state")
}
})
}
func TestState_MaybeMoveAbsResourceInstance(t *testing.T) {
state := NewState()
rootModule := state.RootModule()
rootModule.SetResourceInstanceCurrent(
addrs.Resource{
Mode: addrs.ManagedResourceMode,
Type: "test_thing",
Name: "foo",
}.Instance(addrs.NoKey),
&ResourceInstanceObjectSrc{
Status: ObjectReady,
SchemaVersion: 1,
AttrsJSON: []byte(`{"woozles":"confuzles"}`),
},
addrs.AbsProviderConfig{
Provider: addrs.NewDefaultProvider("test"),
Module: addrs.RootModule,
},
)
// For a little extra fun, let's go from a resource to a resource instance: test_thing.foo to test_thing.bar[1]
src := addrs.Resource{Mode: addrs.ManagedResourceMode, Type: "test_thing", Name: "foo"}.Instance(addrs.NoKey).Absolute(addrs.RootModuleInstance)
dst := addrs.Resource{Mode: addrs.ManagedResourceMode, Type: "test_thing", Name: "foo"}.Instance(addrs.IntKey(1)).Absolute(addrs.RootModuleInstance)
// First move, success
t.Run("first move", func(t *testing.T) {
moved := state.MaybeMoveAbsResourceInstance(src, dst)
if !moved {
t.Fatal("wrong result")
}
got := state.ResourceInstance(dst)
if got == nil {
t.Fatal("destination resource instance not in state")
}
})
// Moving a resource instance that doesn't exist in state to a resource which does exist should be a noop.
t.Run("noop", func(t *testing.T) {
moved := state.MaybeMoveAbsResourceInstance(src, dst)
if moved {
t.Fatal("wrong result")
}
})
}
func TestState_MoveModuleInstance(t *testing.T) {
state := NewState()
srcModule := addrs.RootModuleInstance.Child("kinder", addrs.NoKey)
m := state.EnsureModule(srcModule)
m.SetResourceInstanceCurrent(
addrs.Resource{
Mode: addrs.ManagedResourceMode,
Type: "test_thing",
Name: "foo",
}.Instance(addrs.NoKey),
&ResourceInstanceObjectSrc{
Status: ObjectReady,
SchemaVersion: 1,
AttrsJSON: []byte(`{"woozles":"confuzles"}`),
},
addrs.AbsProviderConfig{
Provider: addrs.NewDefaultProvider("test"),
Module: addrs.RootModule,
},
)
dstModule := addrs.RootModuleInstance.Child("child", addrs.IntKey(3))
state.MoveModuleInstance(srcModule, dstModule)
// srcModule should have been removed, dstModule should exist and have one resource
if len(state.Modules) != 2 { // kinder[3] and root
t.Fatalf("wrong number of modules in state. Expected 2, got %d", len(state.Modules))
}
got := state.Module(dstModule)
if got == nil {
t.Fatal("dstModule not found")
}
gone := state.Module(srcModule)
if gone != nil {
t.Fatal("srcModule not removed from state")
}
r := got.Resource(mustAbsResourceAddr("test_thing.foo").Resource)
if r.Addr.Module.String() != dstModule.String() {
fmt.Println(r.Addr.Module.String())
t.Fatal("resource address was not updated")
}
}
func TestState_MaybeMoveModuleInstance(t *testing.T) {
state := NewState()
src := addrs.RootModuleInstance.Child("child", addrs.StringKey("a"))
cm := state.EnsureModule(src)
cm.SetResourceInstanceCurrent(
addrs.Resource{
Mode: addrs.ManagedResourceMode,
Type: "test_thing",
Name: "foo",
}.Instance(addrs.NoKey),
&ResourceInstanceObjectSrc{
Status: ObjectReady,
SchemaVersion: 1,
AttrsJSON: []byte(`{"woozles":"confuzles"}`),
},
addrs.AbsProviderConfig{
Provider: addrs.NewDefaultProvider("test"),
Module: addrs.RootModule,
},
)
dst := addrs.RootModuleInstance.Child("kinder", addrs.StringKey("b"))
// First move, success
t.Run("first move", func(t *testing.T) {
moved := state.MaybeMoveModuleInstance(src, dst)
if !moved {
t.Fatal("wrong result")
}
})
// Second move, should be a noop
t.Run("noop", func(t *testing.T) {
moved := state.MaybeMoveModuleInstance(src, dst)
if moved {
t.Fatal("wrong result")
}
})
}
func TestState_MoveModule(t *testing.T) {
// For this test, add two module instances (kinder and kinder["a"]).
// MoveModule(kinder) should move both instances.
state := NewState() // starter state, should be copied by the subtests.
srcModule := addrs.RootModule.Child("kinder")
m := state.EnsureModule(srcModule.UnkeyedInstanceShim())
m.SetResourceInstanceCurrent(
addrs.Resource{
Mode: addrs.ManagedResourceMode,
Type: "test_thing",
Name: "foo",
}.Instance(addrs.NoKey),
&ResourceInstanceObjectSrc{
Status: ObjectReady,
SchemaVersion: 1,
AttrsJSON: []byte(`{"woozles":"confuzles"}`),
},
addrs.AbsProviderConfig{
Provider: addrs.NewDefaultProvider("test"),
Module: addrs.RootModule,
},
)
moduleInstance := addrs.RootModuleInstance.Child("kinder", addrs.StringKey("a"))
mi := state.EnsureModule(moduleInstance)
mi.SetResourceInstanceCurrent(
addrs.Resource{
Mode: addrs.ManagedResourceMode,
Type: "test_thing",
Name: "foo",
}.Instance(addrs.NoKey),
&ResourceInstanceObjectSrc{
Status: ObjectReady,
SchemaVersion: 1,
AttrsJSON: []byte(`{"woozles":"confuzles"}`),
},
addrs.AbsProviderConfig{
Provider: addrs.NewDefaultProvider("test"),
Module: addrs.RootModule,
},
)
_, mc := srcModule.Call()
src := mc.Absolute(addrs.RootModuleInstance.Child("kinder", addrs.NoKey))
t.Run("basic", func(t *testing.T) {
s := state.DeepCopy()
_, dstMC := addrs.RootModule.Child("child").Call()
dst := dstMC.Absolute(addrs.RootModuleInstance.Child("child", addrs.NoKey))
s.MoveModule(src, dst)
// srcModule should have been removed, dstModule should exist and have one resource
if len(s.Modules) != 3 { // child, child["a"] and root
t.Fatalf("wrong number of modules in state. Expected 3, got %d", len(s.Modules))
}
got := s.Module(dst.Module)
if got == nil {
t.Fatal("dstModule not found")
}
got = s.Module(addrs.RootModuleInstance.Child("child", addrs.StringKey("a")))
if got == nil {
t.Fatal("dstModule instance \"a\" not found")
}
gone := s.Module(srcModule.UnkeyedInstanceShim())
if gone != nil {
t.Fatal("srcModule not removed from state")
}
})
t.Run("nested modules", func(t *testing.T) {
s := state.DeepCopy()
// add a child module to module.kinder
mi := mustParseModuleInstanceStr(`module.kinder.module.grand[1]`)
m := s.EnsureModule(mi)
m.SetResourceInstanceCurrent(
addrs.Resource{
Mode: addrs.ManagedResourceMode,
Type: "test_thing",
Name: "foo",
}.Instance(addrs.NoKey),
&ResourceInstanceObjectSrc{
Status: ObjectReady,
SchemaVersion: 1,
AttrsJSON: []byte(`{"woozles":"confuzles"}`),
},
addrs.AbsProviderConfig{
Provider: addrs.NewDefaultProvider("test"),
Module: addrs.RootModule,
},
)
_, dstMC := addrs.RootModule.Child("child").Call()
dst := dstMC.Absolute(addrs.RootModuleInstance.Child("child", addrs.NoKey))
s.MoveModule(src, dst)
moved := s.Module(addrs.RootModuleInstance.Child("child", addrs.StringKey("a")))
if moved == nil {
t.Fatal("dstModule not found")
}
// The nested module's relative address should also have been updated
nested := s.Module(mustParseModuleInstanceStr(`module.child.module.grand[1]`))
if nested == nil {
t.Fatal("nested child module of src wasn't moved")
}
})
}
func mustParseModuleInstanceStr(str string) addrs.ModuleInstance {
addr, diags := addrs.ParseModuleInstanceStr(str)
if diags.HasErrors() {
panic(diags.Err())
}
return addr
}
func mustAbsResourceAddr(s string) addrs.AbsResource {
addr, diags := addrs.ParseAbsResourceStr(s)
if diags.HasErrors() {
panic(diags.Err())
}
return addr
}