add dynamic_container_enabled support for datafactory

[brandonros]

part of #15691

[katbyte]

Thanks @brandonros - LGTM 👍

[github-actions]

This functionality has been released in v3.1.0 of the Terraform Provider. Please see the Terraform documentation on provider versioning or reach out if you need any assistance upgrading.

For further feature requests or bug reports with this functionality, please create a new GitHub issue following the template. Thank you!

[gregops312]

@katbyte I believe this change may have broken data_factory_datasets, I just went from 3.0.2 to 3.1.0 and now all datasets break with the same error. My hunch is that no content is being passed from any of the datasets for example delimited text.

│ Error: setting `azure_blob_storage_location` for Data Factory Delimited Text Dataset Invalid address to set: []string{"azure_blob_storage_location", "0", "dynamic_container_enabled"}
│
│   with module.fusion.module.df_ds_model_input_source.azurerm_data_factory_dataset_delimited_text.self,
│   on ../../../../delimited_text.tf line 1, in resource "azurerm_data_factory_dataset_delimited_text" "self":
│    1: resource "azurerm_data_factory_dataset_delimited_text" "self" {

Should a new issue be explicitly created?

[brandonros]

Let’s work together to try to roll forward instead of roll backward. Any guesses on how to fix?

[gregops312]

Oh, I'm fine with rolling forward, but I'm not entirely sure how to try fixing it. As in, I would be curious to add the needed arguments to the resources and the matching tests, but I don't yet know how/if I could use a local build in my code to prove to myself that that is the change that solved the problem.

[gregops312]

So I think the PR above fixes the issue, hopefully everywhere. I feel a little out of my depth. I'm definitely making best guesses on some of this.

[mbfrahry]

Hey all, I found and fixed the issue with #16514. What happened was that dynamic_container_enabled wasn't added to the schema for azure_blob_storage_location. That has been fixed with #16514 and should go out in the next release!

[gregops312]

@mbfrahry So I have a PR open for this too with additional tests, #16350 but I guess I have some failing tests, but I didn't see a job failure, and I haven't gotten to digging into it yet.

[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.