-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.6k
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
Update azurerm_kubernetes_cluster for GA #1389
Comments
I would gladly contribute to this, but looks like we are dependant on azure-sdk-for-go to include the new package from autorest containerservices (package-2018-03)? Currently I haven't contributed to this project before, so I'm new to how the dependency to the |
Right, this seems relevant for us. We require advanced networking, and face problems when creating an AKS cluster from Terraform. When creating the cluster from the Azure Portal, there are 31 "connected devices" on the vnet per NIC (i.e. per host/vm in the cluster), which makes sense with maximum 30 pods per host. When we create the cluster from Terraform, specifing |
Also agent_pool_profile, os_type=windows has a dependency on windowsProfile but that is not documented or in the code.
|
@twem I think Windows agent is still in private preview. At least according to this: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/aks/faq
I did try anyway of course :-), using an ARM template with additional agent pool using
It could be failing for a different reason though. |
Windows is not available in AKS yet. |
The new/GA API version should be available in v17.4 of the Azure SDK for Go: Azure/azure-sdk-for-go#2069 - once that's merged we'll look into updating to that version and then it should be possible to implement this. |
Upgrading to the GA API also means the Private Networking Route Table bug (detailed in the docs) is resolved: #1197 (comment) |
Any ETA for this? :D |
Made a start on this. So far have the containerservices upgraded to 2018-03-31 - This is my first attempt at anything GO, so some guidance would be much appreciated! Feel free to start again and overtake me if you must. The plan is to fully upgrade to v16.2.1 before I even attempt extra implementations. So far I've only managed containerservices. Will probably open a PR tomorrow for the upgrade standalone if nobody has issues with that.
https://github.com/lfshr/terraform-provider-azurerm/tree/azure-sdk-for-go/v16.2.1 |
looks like the sdk fix is released, any plans when this will be merged? |
@lfshr thanks for looking into this. We upgrade the entire SDK holistically; which we're doing in #1418 - that said the changes in your branch otherwise look good. Would you be able to remove the vendoring from your branch and then we should be able to use that once #1418 has been merged :) Once the SDK's upgrades been merged and we've switched over to the GA version (as in your branch) - it should be possible to add the new functionality :) Thanks! |
@tombuildsstuff no problem :) I'm actually really digging go so far! I'm still coming to grips with how this is all glued together. Shall I leave the inclusion of the containerservices 2018-03-31 vendor in, will that be included in #1418, or shall that go in as a separate PR altogether? I notice it's not currently included in #1418 |
@tombuildsstuff I've removed the autorest upgrade and the removal of containerservices 2017-09-30 for now. I can't remove the addition of 2018-03-31 as there were a few breaking changes between the two versions. I'm happy for this to go in separately with another cleanup PR to remove 2017-09-30. I'm easy either way. |
@lfshr sounds good. Once the SDK upgrades merged, we can rebase that branch on top and then remove the old API version :) |
Hey @tombuildsstuff I see that PR got merged. I've rebased to the latest version of master and stuck my code in a more suitable named branch. Let us know what your plan is. |
Any updates on this? |
@lfshr sorry for the delayed response here; would you mind sending a PR for that? Looking at the code, other than fixing the vendoring that branch otherwise looks good to me 👍 |
@tombuildsstuff should we pull this into a separate branch? This is just the update itself with no new implementations. Looking at the vendor stuff just now. |
@lfshr I'd suggest we upgrade to the new API and then we can add the new fields since they're related, but not dependent tasks (and that'll allow us to fix the routing table bug mentioned above in the interim) - what do you think? |
#1474 opened |
Started work on advanced networking implementation. Active feedback would be appreciated 😄 PS. I have zero pride. Don't worry about hurting it! 😛 Currently most of the params are not flagged as ForceNew. I assume this to be needed for all of them, but I want to test scenarios before jumping to my assumption. |
NetworkProfile implementation seems to be finished.. Just tests to add. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Since the original issue here's been resolved I'm going to lock this issue for the moment. |
AKS has gone GA. Main functionality now lacking is the basic\advanced network setting and the various parameters if advanced is chosen:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: