Previously our graph walker expected to recieve a data structure
containing schemas for all of the provider and provisioner plugins used in
the configuration and state. That made sense back when
terraform.NewContext was responsible for loading all of the schemas before
taking any other action, but it no longer has that responsiblity.
Instead, we'll now make sure that the "contextPlugins" object reaches all
of the locations where we need schema -- many of which already had access
to that object anyway -- and then load the needed schemas just in time.
The contextPlugins object memoizes schema lookups, so we can safely call
it many times with the same provider address or provisioner type name and
know that it'll still only load each distinct plugin once per Context
object.
As of this commit, the Context.Schemas method is now a public interface
only and not used by logic in the "terraform" package at all. However,
that does leave us in a rather tenuous situation of relying on the fact
that all practical users of terraform.Context end up calling "Schemas" at
some point in order to verify that we have all of the expected versions
of plugins. That's a non-obvious implicit dependency, and so in subsequent
commits we'll gradually move all responsibility for verifying plugin
versions into the caller of terraform.NewContext, which'll heal a
long-standing architectural wart whereby the caller is responsible for
installing and locating the plugin executables but not for verifying that
what's installed is conforming to the current configuration and dependency
lock file.
Previously terraform.Context was built in an unfortunate way where all of
the data was provided up front in terraform.NewContext and then mutated
directly by subsequent operations. That made the data flow hard to follow,
commonly leading to bugs, and also meant that we were forced to take
various actions too early in terraform.NewContext, rather than waiting
until a more appropriate time during an operation.
This (enormous) commit changes terraform.Context so that its fields are
broadly just unchanging data about the execution context (current
workspace name, available plugins, etc) whereas the main data Terraform
works with arrives via individual method arguments and is returned in
return values.
Specifically, this means that terraform.Context no longer "has-a" config,
state, and "planned changes", instead holding on to those only temporarily
during an operation. The caller is responsible for propagating the outcome
of one step into the next step so that the data flow between operations is
actually visible.
However, since that's a change to the main entry points in the "terraform"
package, this commit also touches every file in the codebase which
interacted with those APIs. Most of the noise here is in updating tests
to take the same actions using the new API style, but this also affects
the main-code callers in the backends and in the command package.
My goal here was to refactor without changing observable behavior, but in
practice there are a couple externally-visible behavior variations here
that seemed okay in service of the broader goal:
- The "terraform graph" command is no longer hooked directly into the
core graph builders, because that's no longer part of the public API.
However, I did include a couple new Context functions whose contract
is to produce a UI-oriented graph, and _for now_ those continue to
return the physical graph we use for those operations. There's no
exported API for generating the "validate" and "eval" graphs, because
neither is particularly interesting in its own right, and so
"terraform graph" no longer supports those graph types.
- terraform.NewContext no longer has the responsibility for collecting
all of the provider schemas up front. Instead, we wait until we need
them. However, that means that some of our error messages now have a
slightly different shape due to unwinding through a differently-shaped
call stack. As of this commit we also end up reloading the schemas
multiple times in some cases, which is functionally acceptable but
likely represents a performance regression. I intend to rework this to
use caching, but I'm saving that for a later commit because this one is
big enough already.
The proximal reason for this change is to resolve the chicken/egg problem
whereby there was previously no single point where we could apply "moved"
statements to the previous run state before creating a plan. With this
change in place, we can now do that as part of Context.Plan, prior to
forking the input state into the three separate state artifacts we use
during planning.
However, this is at least the third project in a row where the previous
API design led to piling more functionality into terraform.NewContext and
then working around the incorrect order of operations that produces, so
I intend that by paying the cost/risk of this large diff now we can in
turn reduce the cost/risk of future projects that relate to our main
workflow actions.
* terraform: use hcl.MergeBodies instead of configs.MergeBodies for provider configuration
Previously, Terraform would return an error if the user supplied provider configuration via interactive input iff the configuration provided on the command line was missing any required attributes - even if those attributes were already set in config.
That error came from configs.MergeBody, which was designed for overriding valid configuration. It expects that the first ("base") body has all required attributes. However in the case of interactive input for provider configuration, it is perfectly valid if either or both bodies are missing required attributes, as long as the final body has all required attributes. hcl.MergeBodies works very similarly to configs.MergeBodies, with a key difference being that it only checks that all required attributes are present after the two bodies are merged.
I've updated the existing test to use interactive input vars and a schema with all required attributes. This test failed before switching from configs.MergeBodies to hcl.MergeBodies.
* add a command package test that shows that we can still have providers with dynamic configuration + required + interactive input merging
This test failed when buildProviderConfig still used configs.MergeBodies instead of hcl.MergeBodies
This is part of a general effort to move all of Terraform's non-library
package surface under internal in order to reinforce that these are for
internal use within Terraform only.
If you were previously importing packages under this prefix into an
external codebase, you could pin to an earlier release tag as an interim
solution until you've make a plan to achieve the same functionality some
other way.
This is part of a general effort to move all of Terraform's non-library
package surface under internal in order to reinforce that these are for
internal use within Terraform only.
If you were previously importing packages under this prefix into an
external codebase, you could pin to an earlier release tag as an interim
solution until you've make a plan to achieve the same functionality some
other way.
This is part of a general effort to move all of Terraform's non-library
package surface under internal in order to reinforce that these are for
internal use within Terraform only.
If you were previously importing packages under this prefix into an
external codebase, you could pin to an earlier release tag as an interim
solution until you've make a plan to achieve the same functionality some
other way.
This is part of a general effort to move all of Terraform's non-library
package surface under internal in order to reinforce that these are for
internal use within Terraform only.
If you were previously importing packages under this prefix into an
external codebase, you could pin to an earlier release tag as an interim
solution until you've make a plan to achieve the same functionality some
other way.
This is part of a general effort to move all of Terraform's non-library
package surface under internal in order to reinforce that these are for
internal use within Terraform only.
If you were previously importing packages under this prefix into an
external codebase, you could pin to an earlier release tag as an interim
solution until you've make a plan to achieve the same functionality some
other way.
Martin Atkins