-
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
[Bug]: reading RAM Resource Share (YYY) Principal Association (XXXX): couldn't find resource (21 retries) #33985
Comments
Community NoteVoting for Prioritization
Volunteering to Work on This Issue
|
Other tests show AWS API returns value for
|
This functionality has been released in v5.32.0 of the Terraform AWS Provider. Please see the Terraform documentation on provider versioning or reach out if you need any assistance upgrading. For further feature requests or bug reports with this functionality, please create a new GitHub issue following the template. 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. |
Terraform Core Version
1.2.2
AWS Provider Version
5.21.0
Affected Resource(s)
Expected Behavior
Resource defenition of RAM principal association should be able to read and update the defined associations, even when a large number of associations exist
Terraform provider / AWS SDK should respect
nextToken
when provided in the response and proceed with the next request withNextToken
in the requestActual Behavior
Terraform plan fails with the error
From the debug logs, it seems that the API response includes
nextToken
param in the first reponse whileresourceShareAssociations
is an empty arrayThe issue has been detected in Paris region (eu-west-3) only
Relevant Error/Panic Output Snippet
No response
Terraform Configuration Files
Steps to Reproduce
Debug Output
Behaviour from Terraform
Behaviour from AWS CLI
Panic Output
No response
Important Factoids
No response
References
No response
Would you like to implement a fix?
No
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: