* merge master
* added new constructs/naming for deploy scripts, etc.
* suppress az login output
* merge of CI config
* initial commit; not working yet
* initial commit - added files - draft
* troubleshooting image uri
* null_resource added
* updating simple linux with Hashicorp's master
* in progress
* small README edit
* in progress
* adding graph to README of azure-vnet-two-subnets
* added graph to azure-vm-simple-linux-managed-disk
* cleanup
* chmod on deploy.ci.sh
* in progress; changed uri variables
* adding variables to deploy scripts
* chmod deploy.mac.sh
* in progress; troubleshooting variables
* deploys locally successfully
* returning cleanup to deploy
* typo on deploy.ci.sh
* added graph to README
* changed the subnet_id variable in ci
* reverting to Hashicorp's travis.yml
Fixes: #14006Fixes: #14464
IPv6 wasn't supported for adding routes to the internet gateway.
Resulted in a message as follows:
```
Error creating route: MissingParameter: The request must contain the parameter destinationCidrBlock or destinationIpv6CidrBlock
```
```
% make testacc TEST=./builtin/providers/aws TESTARGS='-run=TestAccAWSRoute_'
==> Checking that code complies with gofmt requirements...
go generate $(go list ./... | grep -v /terraform/vendor/)
2017/05/15 11:50:43 Generated command/internal_plugin_list.go
TF_ACC=1 go test ./builtin/providers/aws -v -run=TestAccAWSRoute_ -timeout 120m
=== RUN TestAccAWSRoute_basic
--- PASS: TestAccAWSRoute_basic (67.27s)
=== RUN TestAccAWSRoute_ipv6Support
--- PASS: TestAccAWSRoute_ipv6Support (59.35s)
=== RUN TestAccAWSRoute_ipv6ToInternetGateway
--- PASS: TestAccAWSRoute_ipv6ToInternetGateway (67.39s)
=== RUN TestAccAWSRoute_changeCidr
--- PASS: TestAccAWSRoute_changeCidr (103.68s)
=== RUN TestAccAWSRoute_noopdiff
--- PASS: TestAccAWSRoute_noopdiff (194.32s)
=== RUN TestAccAWSRoute_doesNotCrashWithVPCEndpoint
--- PASS: TestAccAWSRoute_doesNotCrashWithVPCEndpoint (71.36s)
PASS
ok github.com/hashicorp/terraform/builtin/providers/aws 563.397s
```
> This validation checks that there are now splat variables referencing ourself. This currently is not allowed.
=>
> This validation checks that there are no splat variables referencing ourself. This currently is not allowed.
The acceptance tests for spot_instance_requests were showing falures as
follows:
```
------- Stdout: -------
=== RUN TestAccAWSSpotInstanceRequest_basic
--- FAIL: TestAccAWSSpotInstanceRequest_basic (100.40s)
testing.go:280: Step 0 error: After applying this step, the plan was not empty:
DIFF:
UPDATE: aws_spot_instance_request.foo
volume_tags.%: "" => "<computed>"
```
This was because we were setting volume_tags as computed and thus the
diff. We needed to override the schema to make sure that it was not
being computed - it's only aws_instance that needs computed tags because
of EBS volumes
```
% make testacc TEST=./builtin/providers/aws TESTARGS='-run=TestAccAWSSpotInstanceRequest_'
==> Checking that code complies with gofmt requirements...
go generate $(go list ./... | grep -v /terraform/vendor/)
2017/05/15 10:41:36 Generated command/internal_plugin_list.go
TF_ACC=1 go test ./builtin/providers/aws -v -run=TestAccAWSSpotInstanceRequest_ -timeout 120m
=== RUN TestAccAWSSpotInstanceRequest_basic
--- PASS: TestAccAWSSpotInstanceRequest_basic (86.93s)
=== RUN TestAccAWSSpotInstanceRequest_withBlockDuration
--- PASS: TestAccAWSSpotInstanceRequest_withBlockDuration (97.47s)
=== RUN TestAccAWSSpotInstanceRequest_vpc
--- PASS: TestAccAWSSpotInstanceRequest_vpc (234.56s)
=== RUN TestAccAWSSpotInstanceRequest_SubnetAndSG
--- PASS: TestAccAWSSpotInstanceRequest_SubnetAndSG (146.16s)
PASS
ok github.com/hashicorp/terraform/builtin/providers/aws 565.131s
```
* Adds ExpressRoute circuit documentation
* Adds tests and doc improvements
* Code for basic Express Route Circuit support
* Use the built-in validation helper
* Added ignoreCaseDiffSuppressFunc to a few fields
* Added more information to docs
* Touchup
* Moving SKU properties into a set.
* Updates doc
* A bit more tweaks
* Switch to Sprintf for test string
* Updating the acceptance test name for consistency
These tests cover the new refresh behaviour and would fail with "index
out of range" if the refresh graph is not expanded to take new resources
into account as well (scale out), or if it does not with expanded count
orphans in a way that makes sure they don't get interpolated when walked
(scale in).
Currently, the refresh graph uses the resources from state as a base,
with data sources then layered on. Config is not consulted for resources
and hence new resources that are added with count (or any new resource
from config, for that matter) do not get added to the graph during
refresh.
This is leading to issues with scale in and scale out when the same
value for count is used in both resources, and data sources that may
depend on that resource (and possibly vice versa). While the resources
exist in config and can be used, the fact that ConfigTransformer for
resources is missing means that they don't get added into the graph,
leading to "index out of range" errors and what not.
Further to that, if we add these new resources to the graph for scale
out, considerations need to be taken for scale in as well, which are not
being caught 100% by the current implementation of
NodeRefreshableDataResource. Scale-in resources should be treated as
orphans, which according to the instance-form NodeRefreshableResource
node, should be NodeDestroyableDataResource nodes, but this this logic
is currently not rolled into NodeRefreshableDataResource. This causes
issues on scale-in in the form of race-ish "index out of range" errors
again.
This commit updates the refresh graph so that StateTransformer is no
longer used as the base of the graph. Instead, we add resources from the
state and config in a hybrid fashion:
* First off, resource nodes are added from config, but only if
resources currently exist in state. NodeRefreshableManagedResource
is a new expandable resource node that will expand count and add
orphans from state. Any count-expanded node that has config but no
state is also transformed into a plannable resource, via a new
ResourceRefreshPlannableTransformer.
* The NodeRefreshableDataResource node type will now add count orphans
as NodeDestroyableDataResource nodes. This achieves the same effect
as if the data sources were added by StateTransformer, but ensures
there are no races in the dependency chain, with the added benefit of
directing these nodes straight to the proper
NodeDestroyableDataResource node.
* Finally, config orphans (nodes that don't exist in config anymore
period) are then added, to complete the graph.
This should ensure as much as possible that there is a refresh graph
that best represents both the current state and config with updated
variables and counts.
Annie Hedgpeth