-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 9.3k
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
aws_route53_resource with alias to ELB has changed after 0.7.5 upgrade #306
Comments
I am also facing this issue, any ideas on whether a fix is in the works? |
Any progress on this one? The following config attempts to recreate the route53 record each time, despite no changes. What is causing this? data "aws_lb" "example" {
arn = "arn:aws:elasticloadbalancing:us-east-1:***:loadbalancer/app/example/***"
}
data "aws_route53_zone" "internal_dns" {
name = "company.internal"
private_zone = true
}
resource "aws_route53_record" "company-service" {
zone_id = "${data.aws_route53_zone.internal_dns.zone_id}"
name = "${var.name}"
type = "A"
alias {
evaluate_target_health = false
name = "${data.aws_lb.example.dns_name}"
zone_id = "${data.aws_lb.example.zone_id}"
}
} |
I just noticed the following in the console upon terraform apply:
Is it the case difference in |
So re-reading the issue after finding a solution to my own issue, I realise that despite similar behaviour... what I was describing is unrelated to this issue (does anyone know of the issue number where mine belongs?). For what it was worth, I was able to work around my issue by specifying alias |
Oh nice. You guys release so fast! (That is a good thing). I should have checked if I was on the latest. I am on version 1.7.1 (terraform 0.11.2). Once all my work is done. I'll do an upgrade of terraform and all its plugins. In my templates, I pin to specific versions because in the past I have been bitten by not doing that. Thanks for redirecting me. Sorry about the off-topic posts. |
Not sure, if this is the right place for this, but I am facing the same issue when working with aws instances, instead of elb. If I create an instance and then later update the count from 1 to 2, then terraform plan, shows that it will delete and add the Route 53 entries again, even though nothing about the first instance has changed. I have just downloaded v0.11.4 (latest as of now), and it shows the same thing. I have no dependency defined in my module at all, so why is it telling me that it will re-create the
|
Marking this issue as stale due to inactivity. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active issues. If this issue receives no comments in the next 30 days it will automatically be closed. Maintainers can also remove the stale label. If this issue was automatically closed and you feel this issue should be reopened, we encourage creating a new issue linking back to this one for added context. Thank you! |
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 feel this issue should be reopened, we encourage creating a new issue linking back to this one for added context. Thanks! |
This issue was originally opened by @mioi as hashicorp/terraform#9289. It was migrated here as part of the provider split. The original body of the issue is below.
Terraform Version
Terraform v0.7.5
Affected Resource(s)
Terraform Configuration Files
Debug Output
(too much to redact)
Panic Output
n/a
Expected Behavior
It should return the No changes. Infrastructure is up-to-date. message when running
terraform plan
.Actual Behavior
It shows that it wants to do this:
Steps to Reproduce
Please list the steps required to reproduce the issue, for example:
terraform plan
Important Factoids
it seems like the main difference (as shown in the
terraform plan
is that previously, with 0.7.4, it prependeddualstack.
to the alias name of the route53 record when you ranterraform apply
. However, the.tfstate
file did not reflect this. With 0.7.5, it seems to want to remove thedualstack.
prefix from the ELB name.References
n/a
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: