-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
fix: Invalid index for google_container_cluster.primary.private_cluster_config[0]
#2354
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
Open
yuval2313
wants to merge
5
commits into
terraform-google-modules:main
Choose a base branch
from
yuval2313:fix/private-cluster-config-invalid-index
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from 2 commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
62e7ff6
fix: set local.cluster_endpoint_for_nodes conditionally based on var.…
yuval2313 e2f2582
fix: setting local.cluster_endpoint_for_nodes to actual master cidr r…
yuval2313 a20ff03
Merge branch 'main' into fix/private-cluster-config-invalid-index
yuval2313 e32e494
Merge branch 'main' into fix/private-cluster-config-invalid-index
apeabody 32fe2a9
Merge branch 'main' into fix/private-cluster-config-invalid-index
apeabody File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
cluster_endpoint_for_nodes
is only used infirewall.tf.tmpl
resources which are already gatedvar.add_cluster_firewall_rules
, etc. So it might be simpler to remove this local (which is always evaluated, hence the issue), and instead evaluate directly in those (gated) resources?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for the feedback :)
Are cluster firewall rules only relevant when enabling private nodes? Because the module allows their creation even without the flag which would also necessitate the same logic.
Before
35.0.0
I noticed that themaster_ipv4_cidr_block
had a default string value which I guess prevented this since private clusters always had this option specified.Now it seems that we may need this since there are many possibilities.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Firewalls rules can still be created with
var.add_cluster_firewall_rules
,var.add_master_webhook_firewall_rules
, andvar.add_shadow_firewall_rules
, regardless of the different scenarios which i described in my first comment:Removing
local.cluster_endpoint_for_nodes
and evaluating directly inside the firewall resources wouldn't simplify the code as it still requires the same logic in order to determine the correct value for the master ip cidr range when firewall rules are created.