This interface is meant to replace the following ones (in use by some providers):
- httpclient.UserAgentString() (e.g. AzureRM, Google)
- terraform.UserAgentString (e.g. OpenStack, ProfitBricks)
- terraform.VersionString (e.g. AWS, AzureStack, DigitalOcean, Kubernetes)
This also proposes the initial UA string to be set to
HashiCorp Terraform/X.Y.Z (+https://www.terraform.io)
This also fixes a few things with resource for_each:
It makes validation more like validation for count.
It makes sure the index is stored in the state properly.
Remove reflect.DeepEqual from path comparisons to get reliable results.
The equality issues were only noticed going the grpc interface, so add a
corresponding test to the test provider.
Fix for a crash during terraform plan: If there is a multi-instance
resource (count > 1) where one of the instances was deleted in the
deployment but was still present in the terraform state,
getResourceInstancesAll crashed.
Check not only for rs.Instances[key] to exist, but also to have a
valid Current pointer.
This also includes a previously-missing test that verifies the behavior
described here, implemented as a planning context test for consistency
with how the other ignore_changes tests are handled.
Makre sure private data is maintained all the way to destroy. This
slipped through, since private data isn't used much for current
providers, except for timeouts.
Send Private data blob through ReadResource as well. This will allow for
extra flexibility for future providers that may want to pass data out of
band through to their resource Read functions.
The config is statically validated early on for structural issues, but
the provider can't validate any inputs that were unknown at the time.
Run ValidateResourceTypeConfig during Plan, so that the provider can
validate the final config values, including those interpolated from
other resources.
* core: don't panic in NodeAbstractResourceInstance References()
It is possible for s.Current to be nil. This was hard to reproduce, so
the root cause is still unknown, but we can guard against the symptom.
* add log statement
This is a "should never happen" case, because we shouldn't ever have
resources in the plan that aren't in the configuration, but since we've
got a report of a crash here (which went away before we got a chance to
debug it) here's just an extra guard to ensure that we'll still exit
gracefully in that case.
If we see this error crop up again in future, it'd be nice to gather a
full trace log so we can see what GraphNodeAttachResourceConfig did and
why it did not attach a configuration.
Previously we tried to short-circuit this if the schema version hadn't
changed and we were already using JSON serialization. However, if we
instead call into UpgradeResourceState every time we can let the provider
or the SDK do some general, systematic normalization and cleanup steps
without always requiring a schema version increase.
What exactly would be fixed up this way is for the SDK to decide, but for
example the SDK might choose to automatically delete from the state
anything that is no longer present in the schema, avoiding the need to
write explicit state migration functions for that common case where the
remedy is always the same.
The actual update logic is delegated to the provider/SDK intentionally so
that it can evolve over time and potentially differ depending on how
each SDK thinks about schema.
With the new ConfigModeAttr, we can now have complex structures come in
as attributes rather than blocks. Previously attributes were either
known, or unknown, and there was no reason to descend into them. We now
need to record the complete path to unknown values within complex
attributes to create a proper diff after shimming the config.
If a datasource's dependencies have planned changes, then we need to
plan a read for the data source, because the config may change once the
dependencies have been applied.
The count for a data resource can potentially depend on a managed resource
that isn't recorded in the state yet, in which case references to it will
always return unknown.
Ideally we'd do the data refreshes during the plan phase as discussed in
#17034, which would avoid this problem by planning the managed resources
in the same walk, but for now we'll just skip refreshing any data
resources with an unknown count during refresh and defer that work to the
apply phase, just as we'd do if there were unknown values in the main
configuration for the data resource.
Earlier on in the v0.12 development cycle we made the decision that the
validation walk should consider input values to always be unknown so that
validation is checking validity for all possible inputs rather than for
a specific set of inputs; checking for a specific set of inputs is the
responsibility of the plan walk.
However, we didn't implement that in the best way: we made the
"terraform validate" command force all of the input variables to unknown
but that was insufficient because it didn't also affect the implicit
validation walk we do as part of "terraform plan" and "terraform apply",
causing those to produce confusingly-different results.
Instead, we'll address the problem directly in the reference resolver code,
ensuring that all variable values will always be treated as an unknown
(of the declared type, so type checking is still possible) during any
validate walk, regardless of which command is running it.
Pam Selle