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

providers/aws: ignore ec2 root devices #877

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jan 28, 2015

Conversation

phinze
Copy link
Contributor

@phinze phinze commented Jan 28, 2015

fixes #859

EC2 root block devices are attached automatically at launch [1] and show
up in DescribeInstances responses from then on. By skipping these when
recording state, Terraform can avoid thinking there should be block
device changes when there are none.

Note this requires that mitchellh/goamz#214 land
first so the proper field is exposed.

[1] http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/RootDeviceStorage.html

fixes #859

EC2 root block devices are attached automatically at launch [1] and show
up in DescribeInstances responses from then on. By skipping these when
recording state, Terraform can avoid thinking there should be block
device changes when there are none.

Note this requires that mitchellh/goamz#214 land
first so the proper field is exposed.

[1] http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/RootDeviceStorage.html
@knuckolls
Copy link
Contributor

this looks good to me. 👍

as a side note, this same problem may occur with the ephemeral drives. I haven't tested it yet but you can see the notes in #858.

@phinze
Copy link
Contributor Author

phinze commented Jan 28, 2015

yup! we'll just need to figure out the shape of the AWS API behavior there, but i'm definitely tracking that issue. in fact, i'll self-assign it now.

@mitchellh
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM. Great job.

mitchellh added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 28, 2015
@mitchellh mitchellh merged commit 36b7f08 into master Jan 28, 2015
@mitchellh mitchellh deleted the i-859-ignore-ec2-root-volume branch January 28, 2015 16:32
@knuckolls
Copy link
Contributor

@phinze nice. thanks. feel free to ping me if you need any context on that issue. i work remotely and i can make time for a hangout if you want to talk it through.

@pmoust
Copy link
Contributor

pmoust commented Feb 16, 2015

Issue with this: #859 (comment)

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented May 4, 2020

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 May 4, 2020
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.

Upgrade from 0.3.5->0.3.6 forces recreation of new aws_instances with block_storage
4 participants