also removed the notion of tags from the redshift security group and
parameter group documentation until that has been implemented
Redshift Cluster CRUD and acceptance tests
Removing the Acceptance test for the Cluster Updates. You cannot delete
a cluster immediately after performing an operation on it. We would need
to add a lot of retry logic to the system to get this test to work
Adding some schema validation for RedShift cluster
Adding the last of the pieces of a first draft of the Redshift work - this is the documentation
Changed the aws_redshift_security_group and aws_redshift_parameter_group
to remove the tags from the schema. Tags are a little bit more
complicated than originally though - I will revisit this later
Then added the schema, CRUD functionality and basic acceptance tests for
aws_redshift_subnet_group
Adding an acceptance test for the Update of subnet_ids in AWS Redshift Subnet Group
A "Layer" is a particular service that forms part of the infrastructure for
a set of applications. Some layers are application servers and others are
pure infrastructure, like MySQL servers or load balancers.
Although the AWS API only has one type called "Layer", it actually has
a number of different "soft" types that each have slightly different
validation rules and extra properties that are packed into the Attributes
map.
To make the validation rule differences explicit in Terraform, and to make
the Terraform structure more closely resemble the OpsWorks UI than its
API, we use a separate resource type per layer type, with the common code
factored out into a shared struct type.
"Stack" is the root concept in OpsWorks, and acts as a container for a number
of different "layers" that each provide some service for an application.
A stack isn't very interesting on its own, but it needs to be created before
any layers can be created.
Here we add an OpsWorks client instance to the central client bundle and
establish a new documentation section, both of which will be fleshed out in
subsequent commits that add some OpsWorks resources.
AWS provides three different ways to create AMIs that each have different
inputs, but once they are complete the same management operations apply.
Thus these three resources each have a different "Create" implementation
but then share the same "Read", "Update" and "Delete" implementations.
With so many AWS provider resources, the docs are getting pretty hard
to navigate. This is particularly true due to the mismatch of some
resources encoding the service name (like aws_route53_record) but some
others ignoring it (like aws_subnet) or using a generic prefix (like
aws_db_instance), which causes an alphabetical ordering to muddle
up all of the services.
Since the AWS UI and docs are themselves oriented around services, most
users should be familiar with the service brands and understand which
resources belong to which service. Thus this categorization follows the
primary categorization used within the AWS Console, preferring EC2-VPC
over EC2-Classic-style bucketing.
* master:
Update CHANGELOG.md
Update CHANGELOG.md
Added affinity group resource.
update link to actually work
provider/azure: Fix SQL client name to match upstream
add warning message to explain scenario of conflicting rules
typo
remove debugging
Update CHANGELOG.md
provider/aws: Add docs for autoscaling_policy + cloudwatch_metric_alarm
provider/aws: Add autoscaling_policy
provider/aws: Add cloudwatch_metric_alarm
rename method, update docs
clean up some conflicts with
clean up old, incompatible test
update tests with another example
update test
remove meta usage, stub test
fix existing tests
Consider security groups with source security groups when hashing
This is an iteration on the great work done by @dalehamel in PRs #2095
and #2109.
The core team went back and forth on how to best model Spot Instance
Requests, requesting and then rejecting a separate-resource
implementation in #2109.
After more internal discussion, we landed once again on a separate
resource to model Spot Instance Requests. Out of respect for
@dalehamel's already-significant donated time, with this I'm attempting
to pick up the work to take this across the finish line.
Important architectural decisions represented here:
* Spot Instance Requests are always of type "persistent", to properly
match Terraform's declarative model.
* The spot_instance_request resource exports several attributes that
are expected to be constantly changing as the spot market changes:
spot_bid_status, spot_request_state, and instance_id. Creating
additional resource dependencies based on these attributes is not
recommended, as Terraform diffs will be continually generated to keep
up with the live changes.
* When a Spot Instance Request is deleted/canceled, an attempt is made
to terminate the last-known attached spot instance. Race conditions
dictate that this attempt cannot guarantee that the associated spot
instance is terminated immediately.
Implementation notes:
* This version of aws_spot_instance_request borrows a lot of common
code from aws_instance.
* In order to facilitate borrowing, we introduce `awsInstanceOpts`, an
internal representation of instance details that's meant to be shared
between resources. The goal here would be to refactor ASG Launch
Configurations to use the same struct.
* The new aws_spot_instance_request acc. test is passing.
* All aws_instance acc. tests remain passing.
- Users
- Groups
- Roles
- Inline policies for the above three
- Instance profiles
- Managed policies
- Access keys
This is most of the data types provided by IAM. There are a few things
missing, but the functionality here is probably sufficient for 95% of
the cases. Makes a dent in #28.
Raphael Randschau