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

don't create separate provisioners for each module #22553

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Aug 22, 2019

Conversation

jbardin
Copy link
Member

@jbardin jbardin commented Aug 21, 2019

There's no reason to start individual provisioners per module path, as
they are not configured per module (or independently at all for that
matter).

Fixes #21584

@jbardin jbardin requested a review from a team August 21, 2019 23:34
There's no reason to start individual provisioners per module path, as
they are not configured per module (or independently at all for that
matter).
We no longer create new provisioners for every module.
@jbardin jbardin force-pushed the jbardin/validate-provisioners branch from f22596c to b1025a9 Compare August 21, 2019 23:42
Copy link
Contributor

@pselle pselle left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good hunting

@jbardin jbardin merged commit 68b1488 into master Aug 22, 2019
@jbardin jbardin deleted the jbardin/validate-provisioners branch August 22, 2019 17:58
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Sep 22, 2019

I'm going to lock this issue 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 similar to this, please open a new issue and complete the issue template so we can capture all the details necessary to investigate further.

@ghost ghost locked and limited conversation to collaborators Sep 22, 2019
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.

After 0.12.0 upgrade teraform spawns 1000+ process and uses 7GB of RAM
2 participants