feat!: Swap count for for_each on subnet IAM resources #1009
Conversation
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
…new subnet is added or removed in the host project
thatcoleyouknow
changed the title
thatcoleyouknow
changed the title
|
FWIW this has been tested internally. If any issues arise once someone kicks off the checks, feel free to @ me. |
|
Could someone tell me what failed in the |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
As an engineer that works for an organization that adds new subnets on a regular basis, we find ourselves constantly having to review very lengthy Terraform plans that are full of
google_compute_subnetwork_iam_memberrecreations. This is partly due to Terraform lists being unordered but this can now be solved for by replacing thecountargument withfor_eachin each of those resources. This would be a one-time breaking change, but it would also make it the last time consumers have to deal subnet IAM grants getting recreated due to changes in the list of subnets passed to this module.If you all have any questions, concerns, or suggestions, I'd be happy to talk through those. I am also an enterprise customer so I can open a feature request with our TAM to try and help prioritize this, if that would help you all.
Thank you!