Replace the old mock provider test functions with modern equivalents.
There were a lot of inconsistencies in how they were used, so we needed
to update a lot of tests to match the correct behavior.
Auditing the graph builder to remove unused transformers (planning does
not need to close provisioners for example), and re-order them. While
many of the transformations are commutative, using the same order
ensures the same behavior between operations when the commutative
property is lost or changed.
Outputs were not being evaluated during import, because it was not added
to the walk filter.
Remove any unnecessary walk filters from all the Execute nodes.
We do not currently need to evaluate module variables in order to
import a resource.
This will likely change once we can select the import provider
automatically, and have a more dynamic method for dispatching providers
to module instances. In the meantime we can avoid the evaluation for now
and prevent a certain class of import errors.
The change was passed into the provisioner node because the normal
NodeApplyableResourceInstance overwrites the prior state with the new
state. This however doesn't matter here, because the resource destroy
node does not do this. Also, even if the updated state were to be used
for some reason with a create provisioner, it would be the correct state
to use at that point.
This new-ish package ended up under "helper" during the 0.12 cycle for
want of some other place to put it, but in retrospect that was an odd
choice because the "helper/" tree is otherwise a bunch of legacy code from
when the SDK lived in this repository.
Here we move it over into the "internal" directory just to distance it
from the guidance of not using "helper/" packages in new projects;
didyoumean is a package we actively use as part of error message hints.
Remove marks for object compatibility tests to allow apply
to continue. Adds a block to the test provider to use
in testing, and extends the sensitivity apply test to include a block
The test for this behavior did not work, because the old mock diff
function does not work correctly. Write a PlanResourceChange function to
return a correct plan.
Allow the evaluation of resource pending deleting only during a full
destroy. With this change we can ensure deposed instances are not
evaluated under normal circumstances, but can be references when needed.
This also allows us to remove the fixup transformer that added
connections so temporary values would evaluate in the correct order when
referencing destroy nodes.
In the majority of cases, we do not want to evaluate resources that are
pending deletion since configuration references only can refer to
resources that is intended to be managed by the configuration. An
exception to that rule is when Terraform is performing a full `destroy`
operation, and providers need to evaluate existing resources for their
configuration.
The loading of the initial instance state was inadvertently skipped when
-refresh=false, causing all resources to appear to be missing from the
state during plan.
If a data source refers to a indexed managed resource, we need to
re-target that reference to the containing resource for planning. Since
data sources use the same mechanism as depends_on for managed resource
references, they can only refer to resources as a whole.
There are situations when a user may want to keep or exclude a map key
using `ignore_changes` which may not be listed directly in the
configuration. This didn't work previously because the transformation
always started off with the configuration, and would never encounter a
key if it was only present in the prior value.
* Split node_resource_abstract.go into two files, putting
NodeAbstractResourceInstance methods in their own file - it was getting
large enough to be tricky for (my) human eyeballs.
* un-exported the functions that were created as part of the EvalTree()
refactor; they did not need to be public.
function
The original EvalReadState node is used only by `NodeAbstractResource`s,
so I've created a new method on NodeAbstractResource which does the same
thing as EvalReadState. When the EvalNode refactor project is complete,
EvalReadState will be removed entirely.
In order to ensure all the starting values agree, and since
ignore_changes is only meant to apply to the configuration, we need to
process the ignore_changes values on the config itself rather than the
proposed value.
This ensures the proposed new value and the config value seen by
providers are coordinated, and still allows us to use the rules laid out
by objchange.AssertPlanValid to compare the result to the configuration.
ignore_changes should only exclude changes to the resource arguments,
and not alter the returned value from PlanResourceChange. This would
effect very few providers, since most current providers don't actively
create their plan, and those that do should be generating computed
values here rather than modifying existing ones.
