14 Commits (449ea72e87da7e697ef7b68283a852cc9cc09045)

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
James Bardin	7a183a0e90	don't assert set block length with unknowns ... If a planned NestingList block value looks like it may represent a dynamic block, we don't check the length since it may be unknown. This check was missing in the NestingSet case, but it applies for the same reason. <	7 years ago
James Bardin	bfa5e7f811	actual value may be unknown in nested list ... When checking AssertObjectCompatible, we need to allow for a possible unkown nested list block, just as we did for a set in 0b2cc62.	7 years ago
Martin Atkins	332010fd56	plans/objchange: Fix handling of dynamic block placeholders ... If a dynamic block (in the HCL dynamic block extension sense) has an unknown value for its for_each argument, it gets expanded to a single placeholder block with all of its attributes set to a unknown values. We can use this as part of a heuristic to relax our object compatibility checks for situations where the plan included an object that appears to be (but isn't necessarily) such a placeholder, allowing for the fact that the one placeholder block could be replaced with zero or more real blocks once the for_each value is known. Previously our heuristic was too strict: it would match only if the only block present was a dynamic placeholder. In practice, users may mix dynamic blocks with static blocks of the same type, so we need to be more liberal to avoid generating incorrect incompatibility errors in such cases.	7 years ago
Martin Atkins	88e76fa9ef	configs/configschema: Introduce the NestingGroup mode for blocks ... In study of existing providers we've found a pattern we werent previously accounting for of using a nested block type to represent a group of arguments that relate to a particular feature that is always enabled but where it improves configuration readability to group all of its settings together in a nested block. The existing NestingSingle was not a good fit for this because it is designed under the assumption that the presence or absence of the block has some significance in enabling or disabling the relevant feature, and so for these always-active cases we'd generate a misleading plan where the settings for the feature appear totally absent, rather than showing the default values that will be selected. NestingGroup is, therefore, a slight variation of NestingSingle where presence vs. absence of the block is not distinguishable (it's never null) and instead its contents are treated as unset when the block is absent. This then in turn causes any default values associated with the nested arguments to be honored and displayed in the plan whenever the block is not explicitly configured. The current SDK cannot activate this mode, but that's okay because its "legacy type system" opt-out flag allows it to force a block to be processed in this way anyway. We're adding this now so that we can introduce the feature in a future SDK without causing a breaking change to the protocol, since the set of possible block nesting modes is not extensible.	7 years ago
Martin Atkins	0b2cc6298b	plans/objchange: Fix panic in AssertObjectCompatible with set blocks ... Our usual "ground rules" for mapping configschema to cty call for the collection values representing nested block types to always be known and non-null, using an empty collection to represent the absense of any blocks of that type so that users can always safely use length(...) etc on them without worrying about them sometimes being null. However, due to some different behaviors in the legacy SDK we've allowed it an exception to this rule which means that we can see unknown and null collections in these positions in object values returned from provider operations like PlanResourceChange and ApplyResourceChange when the legacy SDK opt-out is activated. As a consequence of this, we need to be mindful in our safety check functions, like AssertObjectCompatible here, of tolerating these non-ideal situations to allow the safety checks to complete. We run these checks even when the provider requests an opt-out, because we want to note any inconsistencies as WARNING level log lines to aid in debugging.	7 years ago
Martin Atkins	e831182c8d	plans/objchange: Hide sensitive attribute values in error messages ... Since these error messages get printed in Terraform's output and we encourage users to share them as part of bug reports, we should avoid including sensitive information in them to reduce the risk of accidental exposure.	7 years ago
Martin Atkins	7216049fdb	plans/objchange: Improve precision of AssertObjectCompatible with sets ... Previously we were just asserting that the number of elements didn't grow between planned and actual. We still can't precisely correlate elements in sets with unknown values, but here we adapt some logic we added earlier to config/hcl2shim to ensure that we can find a plausible correlation for each element in each set to at least one element in the other set, and thus catch more cases where set elements might vanish or appear between plan and apply, for improved safety. This will still generate false negatives in some cases where unknown values are present due to having to assume correlation is intended wherever it is possible, but we'll catch situations where the actual value is obviously contrary to what was planned.	7 years ago
James Bardin	78256ae225	return early when comparing Null values	8 years ago
James Bardin	e93d69f18b	more nil/known checks before val.LengthInt	8 years ago
James Bardin	e08a388d3c	check IsKnown on values that may panic	8 years ago
Martin Atkins	32974549cd	plans/objchange: Fix handling of unknown in AssertValueCompatible ... We need to check for the known-ness of the prior value before we check for the null-ness of actual, because it's valid for an unknown value to become a null.	8 years ago
Martin Atkins	8048e9a585	plans/objchange: Don't panic if old or new values are null	8 years ago
Martin Atkins	549544f201	configschema: Handle nested blocks containing dynamic-typed attributes ... We need to make the collection itself be a tuple or object rather than list or map in this case, since otherwise all of the elements of the collection are constrained to be of the same type and that isn't the intent of a provider indicating that it accepts any type.	8 years ago
Martin Atkins	4c78539c2b	plans/objchange: AssertObjectSuperset function ... This function's goal is to ensure that the "final" plan value produced by a provider during the apply step is always consistent with the known parts of the planned value produced during the plan step. Any error produced here indicates a bug in the provider.	8 years ago