fix(scheduler-targets-alpha): create a role per target instead of singleton schedule target role

[gracelu0]

Issue # (if applicable)

Tracking #31785.

Reason for this change

The current logic for creating a schedule target execution role uses a hash on the targetArn to determine if there is an existing role in the stack. Currently if the targetArn contains token values (e.g. intrinsic functions), stack.resolve(targetArn).toString() is used to convert the tokenized ARN into a string. However this always results in [object Object] which then gets hashed, meaning the same role is used for any target where the ARN passed in is not a pure string. This does not follow principle of least privilege, and a singleton role used across multiple different targets/target types can be confusing for the customer to manage.

Description of changes

• Use JSON.stringify() instead of .toString() to produce unique hash (and thus create new role) per target.

Description of how you validated changes

Updated unit tests and integration tests

Checklist

• My code adheres to the CONTRIBUTING GUIDE and DESIGN GUIDELINES

BREAKING CHANGE: Schedule Target will reuse role if target is re-used across schedules. This change triggered replacement of existing roles for Schedule as logical ID of the roles are changed.

---

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache-2.0 license

[aws-cdk-automation]

The pull request linter has failed. See the aws-cdk-automation comment below for failure reasons. If you believe this pull request should receive an exemption, please comment and provide a justification.

A comment requesting an exemption should contain the text Exemption Request. Additionally, if clarification is needed add Clarification Request to a comment.

✅ Updated pull request passes all PRLinter validations. Dismissing previous PRLinter review.

[gracelu0]

When I ran this test with exact it would fail the assertion. From logs:

INFO	Testing equality between "test" and "{\"$Exact\":\"test\"}"

INFO	Assertion Failed: 
{
    "failed": true,
    "assertion": "{\"status\":\"fail\",\"message\":\"!! Expected type object but received string\\n\\\"test\\\"\"}"
}

[samson-keung]

From the logs, it sounds like the message in the queue is the text test, as expected. I wonder if the assertion logic is correct. Can you verify if the message in the queue is indeed test (without quotes)?

[samson-keung]

After looking into this further, I believe ExpectedResult.exact is not fully implemented (code).

[samson-keung]

LGTM! Thank you

[mergify]

Thank you for contributing! Your pull request will be updated from main and then merged automatically (do not update manually, and be sure to allow changes to be pushed to your fork).

missed a comment

[mergify]

Thank you for contributing! Your pull request will be updated from main and then merged automatically (do not update manually, and be sure to allow changes to be pushed to your fork).

[mergify]

Thank you for contributing! Your pull request will be updated from main and then merged automatically (do not update manually, and be sure to allow changes to be pushed to your fork).

[mergify]

Thank you for contributing! Your pull request will be updated from main and then merged automatically (do not update manually, and be sure to allow changes to be pushed to your fork).

[aws-cdk-automation]

AWS CodeBuild CI Report

• CodeBuild project: AutoBuildv2Project1C6BFA3F-wQm2hXv2jqQv
• Commit ID: daea128
• Result: SUCCEEDED
• Build Logs (available for 30 days)

Powered by github-codebuild-logs, available on the AWS Serverless Application Repository

[mergify]

Thank you for contributing! Your pull request will be updated from main and then merged automatically (do not update manually, and be sure to allow changes to be pushed to your fork).

[github-actions]

Comments on closed issues and PRs are hard for our team to see.
If you need help, please open a new issue that references this one.