Use this data source to get the ARN of a certificate in AWS Certificate
Manager (ACM). The process of requesting and verifying a certificate in ACM
requires some manual steps, which means that Terraform cannot automate the
creation of ACM certificates. But using this data source, you can reference
them by domain without having to hard code the ARNs as input.
The acceptance test included requires an ACM certificate be pre-created
in and information about it passed in via environment variables. It's a
bit sad but there's really no other way to do it.
When computing the set key for an EBS block device, we were using
the wrong function; we had hashEphemeralBlockDevice instead of
hashEbsBlockDevice. This caused a panic by trying to access the
virtual_name attribute that will never be set for EBS block
devices.
To fix this, I switched to the hashEbsBlockDevice function, which
is already being used to compute a Set key in the Schema. But in
the default case, where the snapshot_id attribute isn't specified,
this also caused a panic. I updated the way the string to hash is
generated to check for the existence of the device_name and
snapshot_id attributes before we use them, to avoid panics when
these optional attributes aren't set.
Spot fleet requests can have EBS volumes attached to them, and at
the moment we're getting reports that crashes can be experienced
with them. This adds an acceptance test that exercises creating
a Spot Fleet request that has a non-instance EBS volume attached.
This successfully reproduces the panic.
The graph transformation we implement around create_before_destroy
need to re-order all resources that depend on the create_before_destroy
resource. Up until now, we've requires that users mark all of these
resources as create_before_destroy. Data soruces however don't have a
lifecycle block for create_before_destroy, and could not be marked this
way.
This PR checks each DestroyNode that doesn't implement CreateBeforeDestroy
for any ancestors that do implement CreateBeforeDestroy. If there are
any, we inherit the behavior and re-order the graph as such.
Fixes#9840
The new apply graph wasn't properly nesting provisioners. This resulted
in reading the provisioners being nil on apply in the shadow graph which
caused the crash in the above issue.
The actual cause of this is that the new graphs we're moving towards do
not have any "flattening" (they are flat to begin with): all modules are
in the root graph from the beginning of construction versus building a
number of different graphs and flattening them. The transform that adds
the provisioners wasn't modified to handle already-flat graphs and so
was only adding provisioners to the root module, not children.
The change modifies the `MissingProvisionerTransformer` (primarily) to
support already-flat graphs and add provisioners for all module levels.
Tests are there to cover this as well.
**NOTE:** This PR focuses on fixing that specific issue. I'm going to follow up
this PR with another PR that is more focused on being robust against
crashing (more nil checks, recover() for shadow graph, etc.). In the
interest of focus and keeping a PR reviewable this focuses only on the
issue itself.
* GH-8755 - Adding in support to attach ASG to ELB as independent action
* GH-8755 - Adding in docs
* GH-8755 - Adjusting attribute name and responding to other PR feedback
In #8502 it was requested that we add support for the EnableSNI
parameter of Route53's health checks; this enables customers to
manually specify whether or not the health check will use SNI when
communicating with the endpoint.
The customer originally requested we default to `false`. While
implementing the issue, I discovered that when creating health
checks with a Type set to HTTP, Amazon's default value for EnableSNI
is `false`. However, when creating health checks with a Type set to
HTTPS, Amazon's default value is `true`. So rather than setting a
default value, I made the attribute computed.
Fixes#7846
This changes from using the HCL decoder to manually decoding the
`variable` blocks within the configuration. This gives us a lot more
power to catch validation errors. This PR retains the same tests and
fixes one additional issue (covered by a test) in the case where a
variable has no named assigned.
Paul Hinze