storage - add support for storage_account_id to azurerm_storage_container and azurerm_storage_share

[jackofallops]

Community Note

• Please vote on this PR by adding a 👍 reaction to the original PR to help the community and maintainers prioritize for review
• Please do not leave comments along the lines of "+1", "me too" or "any updates", they generate extra noise for PR followers and do not help prioritize for review

Description

This PR introduces the storage_account_id to supersede the storage_account_name property into azurerm_storage_container and azurerm_storage_share. This allows the provider to create and manage these resources via the Resource Manager API rather than the Data Plane.
Existing resources using the storage_account_name property cannot be migrated directly, but can be removed and re-imported using the Resource Manager ID type.

The storage_account_name property is now deprecated in both resources and will be removed in v5.0 of the provider.

The resource_manager_id property is now deprecated in both resources and will be removed in v5.0 of the provider, this value is available as id in resources using storage_account_id.

PR Checklist

• I have followed the guidelines in our Contributing Documentation.
• I have checked to ensure there aren't other open Pull Requests for the same update/change.
• I have checked if my changes close any open issues. If so please include appropriate closing keywords below.
• I have updated/added Documentation as required written in a helpful and kind way to assist users that may be unfamiliar with the resource / data source.
• I have used a meaningful PR title to help maintainers and other users understand this change and help prevent duplicate work.
  For example: “resource_name_here - description of change e.g. adding property new_property_name_here”

Changes to existing Resource / Data Source

• I have added an explanation of what my changes do and why I'd like you to include them (This may be covered by linking to an issue above, but may benefit from additional explanation).
• I have written new tests for my resource or datasource changes & updated any relevent documentation.
• I have successfully run tests with my changes locally. If not, please provide details on testing challenges that prevented you running the tests.
• (For changes that include a state migration only). I have manually tested the migration path between relevant versions of the provider.

Change Log

Below please provide what should go into the changelog (if anything) conforming to the Changelog Format documented here.

• azurerm_storage_container - support for the storage_account_id property
• azurerm_storage_share - support for the storage_account_id property

This is a (please select all that apply):

• Bug Fix
• New Feature (ie adding a service, resource, or data source)
• Enhancement
• Breaking Change

Related Issue(s)

Closes #2977
NOTE: please see #27818 and #27819 for other issues that ended up being tracked/associated with the original issue.
Closes #27607

Note

If this PR changes meaningfully during the course of review please update the title and description as required.

[stephybun]

Thanks @jackofallops.

Thinking ahead for when we make this breaking change in 5.0, would we be able to add a state migration for this so that users don't need to remove and re-import this into their state?

[stephybun]

Thanks @jackofallops LGTM 🐈‍⬛

[jackofallops]

Tests look good:

[github-actions]

I'm going to lock this pull request because it has been closed for 30 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active contributions.
If you have found a problem that seems related to this change, please open a new issue and complete the issue template so we can capture all the details necessary to investigate further.