Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Move volume_tags into dynamic blocks's tags parameter #197

Conversation

dekimsey
Copy link

Description

This effectively removes the churning that is happening when an
ebs_volume is attached separately from the module

Takes advantage of the new feature in the aws provider available as of 3.24.0.
hashicorp/terraform-provider-aws#15474

Motivation and Context

When using this module and creating aws_ebs_volumes/aws_ebs_volume_attachments outside of the module causes constant apply churn because the tags conflict.

Breaking Changes

Tags on the ebs_block_volumes may change
Requires 3.24.0 of aws provider, since this is a major version requirement change in the module

How Has This Been Tested?

I took existing instances with externally defined ebs_volumes and upgraded to this module. I also created resources anew.

Note: I'm still doing a bit more testing to validate, I did notice some initial churn (had to apply twice). But even this is a major behavior improvement.

This effectively removes the churn-ing that is happening when an
ebs_volume is attached separately from the module

Takes advantage of the new feature in the aws provider available as of 3.24.0.
hashicorp/terraform-provider-aws#15474
@dekimsey dekimsey changed the title WIP: Move volume_tags into dynamic blocks's tags parameter Move volume_tags into dynamic blocks's tags parameter Jan 26, 2021
@dekimsey
Copy link
Author

Food for thought: my implementation does not allow for per-volume tag overrides. I think maybe it should, it would alter the TF to look something like:

tags = merge( { Name= ... }, lookup(root_block_device.value, "tags", var.volume_tags ))

@github-actions
Copy link

This PR has been automatically marked as stale because it has been open 30 days
with no activity. Remove stale label or comment or this PR will be closed in 10 days

@github-actions github-actions bot added the stale label Jan 11, 2022
@github-actions
Copy link

This PR was automatically closed because of stale in 10 days

@github-actions github-actions bot closed this Jan 22, 2022
@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Nov 8, 2022

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 issues. 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.

@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Nov 8, 2022
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant