pulumi/pkg/resource/graph/dependency_graph_test.go

784 lines
17 KiB
Go
Raw Normal View History

// Copyright 2016-2021, Pulumi Corporation. All rights reserved.
package graph
import (
"testing"
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
mapset "github.com/deckarep/golang-set/v2"
"github.com/pulumi/pulumi/pkg/v3/resource/deploy/providers"
"github.com/pulumi/pulumi/sdk/v3/go/common/resource"
"github.com/pulumi/pulumi/sdk/v3/go/common/tokens"
"github.com/stretchr/testify/assert"
)
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
func TestDependencyGraph(t *testing.T) {
t.Parallel()
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
// Arrange.
providerA, providerARef := makeProvider("pkg", "providerA", "0")
Implement first-class providers. (#1695) ### First-Class Providers These changes implement support for first-class providers. First-class providers are provider plugins that are exposed as resources via the Pulumi programming model so that they may be explicitly and multiply instantiated. Each instance of a provider resource may be configured differently, and configuration parameters may be source from the outputs of other resources. ### Provider Plugin Changes In order to accommodate the need to verify and diff provider configuration and configure providers without complete configuration information, these changes adjust the high-level provider plugin interface. Two new methods for validating a provider's configuration and diffing changes to the same have been added (`CheckConfig` and `DiffConfig`, respectively), and the type of the configuration bag accepted by `Configure` has been changed to a `PropertyMap`. These changes have not yet been reflected in the provider plugin gRPC interface. We will do this in a set of follow-up changes. Until then, these methods are implemented by adapters: - `CheckConfig` validates that all configuration parameters are string or unknown properties. This is necessary because existing plugins only accept string-typed configuration values. - `DiffConfig` either returns "never replace" if all configuration values are known or "must replace" if any configuration value is unknown. The justification for this behavior is given [here](https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/pull/1695/files#diff-a6cd5c7f337665f5bb22e92ca5f07537R106) - `Configure` converts the config bag to a legacy config map and configures the provider plugin if all config values are known. If any config value is unknown, the underlying plugin is not configured and the provider may only perform `Check`, `Read`, and `Invoke`, all of which return empty results. We justify this behavior becuase it is only possible during a preview and provides the best experience we can manage with the existing gRPC interface. ### Resource Model Changes Providers are now exposed as resources that participate in a stack's dependency graph. Like other resources, they are explicitly created, may have multiple instances, and may have dependencies on other resources. Providers are referred to using provider references, which are a combination of the provider's URN and its ID. This design addresses the need during a preview to refer to providers that have not yet been physically created and therefore have no ID. All custom resources that are not themselves providers must specify a single provider via a provider reference. The named provider will be used to manage that resource's CRUD operations. If a resource's provider reference changes, the resource must be replaced. Though its URN is not present in the resource's dependency list, the provider should be treated as a dependency of the resource when topologically sorting the dependency graph. Finally, `Invoke` operations must now specify a provider to use for the invocation via a provider reference. ### Engine Changes First-class providers support requires a few changes to the engine: - The engine must have some way to map from provider references to provider plugins. It must be possible to add providers from a stack's checkpoint to this map and to register new/updated providers during the execution of a plan in response to CRUD operations on provider resources. - In order to support updating existing stacks using existing Pulumi programs that may not explicitly instantiate providers, the engine must be able to manage the "default" providers for each package referenced by a checkpoint or Pulumi program. The configuration for a "default" provider is taken from the stack's configuration data. The former need is addressed by adding a provider registry type that is responsible for managing all of the plugins required by a plan. In addition to loading plugins froma checkpoint and providing the ability to map from a provider reference to a provider plugin, this type serves as the provider plugin for providers themselves (i.e. it is the "provider provider"). The latter need is solved via two relatively self-contained changes to plan setup and the eval source. During plan setup, the old checkpoint is scanned for custom resources that do not have a provider reference in order to compute the set of packages that require a default provider. Once this set has been computed, the required default provider definitions are conjured and prepended to the checkpoint's resource list. Each resource that requires a default provider is then updated to refer to the default provider for its package. While an eval source is running, each custom resource registration, resource read, and invoke that does not name a provider is trapped before being returned by the source iterator. If no default provider for the appropriate package has been registered, the eval source synthesizes an appropriate registration, waits for it to complete, and records the registered provider's reference. This reference is injected into the original request, which is then processed as usual. If a default provider was already registered, the recorded reference is used and no new registration occurs. ### SDK Changes These changes only expose first-class providers from the Node.JS SDK. - A new abstract class, `ProviderResource`, can be subclassed and used to instantiate first-class providers. - A new field in `ResourceOptions`, `provider`, can be used to supply a particular provider instance to manage a `CustomResource`'s CRUD operations. - A new type, `InvokeOptions`, can be used to specify options that control the behavior of a call to `pulumi.runtime.invoke`. This type includes a `provider` field that is analogous to `ResourceOptions.provider`.
2018-08-07 00:50:29 +00:00
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
a1 := &resource.State{URN: "a1", Provider: providerARef}
a2 := &resource.State{
URN: "a2",
Provider: providerARef,
Dependencies: []resource.URN{a1.URN},
Implement first-class providers. (#1695) ### First-Class Providers These changes implement support for first-class providers. First-class providers are provider plugins that are exposed as resources via the Pulumi programming model so that they may be explicitly and multiply instantiated. Each instance of a provider resource may be configured differently, and configuration parameters may be source from the outputs of other resources. ### Provider Plugin Changes In order to accommodate the need to verify and diff provider configuration and configure providers without complete configuration information, these changes adjust the high-level provider plugin interface. Two new methods for validating a provider's configuration and diffing changes to the same have been added (`CheckConfig` and `DiffConfig`, respectively), and the type of the configuration bag accepted by `Configure` has been changed to a `PropertyMap`. These changes have not yet been reflected in the provider plugin gRPC interface. We will do this in a set of follow-up changes. Until then, these methods are implemented by adapters: - `CheckConfig` validates that all configuration parameters are string or unknown properties. This is necessary because existing plugins only accept string-typed configuration values. - `DiffConfig` either returns "never replace" if all configuration values are known or "must replace" if any configuration value is unknown. The justification for this behavior is given [here](https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/pull/1695/files#diff-a6cd5c7f337665f5bb22e92ca5f07537R106) - `Configure` converts the config bag to a legacy config map and configures the provider plugin if all config values are known. If any config value is unknown, the underlying plugin is not configured and the provider may only perform `Check`, `Read`, and `Invoke`, all of which return empty results. We justify this behavior becuase it is only possible during a preview and provides the best experience we can manage with the existing gRPC interface. ### Resource Model Changes Providers are now exposed as resources that participate in a stack's dependency graph. Like other resources, they are explicitly created, may have multiple instances, and may have dependencies on other resources. Providers are referred to using provider references, which are a combination of the provider's URN and its ID. This design addresses the need during a preview to refer to providers that have not yet been physically created and therefore have no ID. All custom resources that are not themselves providers must specify a single provider via a provider reference. The named provider will be used to manage that resource's CRUD operations. If a resource's provider reference changes, the resource must be replaced. Though its URN is not present in the resource's dependency list, the provider should be treated as a dependency of the resource when topologically sorting the dependency graph. Finally, `Invoke` operations must now specify a provider to use for the invocation via a provider reference. ### Engine Changes First-class providers support requires a few changes to the engine: - The engine must have some way to map from provider references to provider plugins. It must be possible to add providers from a stack's checkpoint to this map and to register new/updated providers during the execution of a plan in response to CRUD operations on provider resources. - In order to support updating existing stacks using existing Pulumi programs that may not explicitly instantiate providers, the engine must be able to manage the "default" providers for each package referenced by a checkpoint or Pulumi program. The configuration for a "default" provider is taken from the stack's configuration data. The former need is addressed by adding a provider registry type that is responsible for managing all of the plugins required by a plan. In addition to loading plugins froma checkpoint and providing the ability to map from a provider reference to a provider plugin, this type serves as the provider plugin for providers themselves (i.e. it is the "provider provider"). The latter need is solved via two relatively self-contained changes to plan setup and the eval source. During plan setup, the old checkpoint is scanned for custom resources that do not have a provider reference in order to compute the set of packages that require a default provider. Once this set has been computed, the required default provider definitions are conjured and prepended to the checkpoint's resource list. Each resource that requires a default provider is then updated to refer to the default provider for its package. While an eval source is running, each custom resource registration, resource read, and invoke that does not name a provider is trapped before being returned by the source iterator. If no default provider for the appropriate package has been registered, the eval source synthesizes an appropriate registration, waits for it to complete, and records the registered provider's reference. This reference is injected into the original request, which is then processed as usual. If a default provider was already registered, the recorded reference is used and no new registration occurs. ### SDK Changes These changes only expose first-class providers from the Node.JS SDK. - A new abstract class, `ProviderResource`, can be subclassed and used to instantiate first-class providers. - A new field in `ResourceOptions`, `provider`, can be used to supply a particular provider instance to manage a `CustomResource`'s CRUD operations. - A new type, `InvokeOptions`, can be used to specify options that control the behavior of a call to `pulumi.runtime.invoke`. This type includes a `provider` field that is analogous to `ResourceOptions.provider`.
2018-08-07 00:50:29 +00:00
}
all: Reformat with gofumpt Per team discussion, switching to gofumpt. [gofumpt][1] is an alternative, stricter alternative to gofmt. It addresses other stylistic concerns that gofmt doesn't yet cover. [1]: https://github.com/mvdan/gofumpt See the full list of [Added rules][2], but it includes: - Dropping empty lines around function bodies - Dropping unnecessary variable grouping when there's only one variable - Ensuring an empty line between multi-line functions - simplification (`-s` in gofmt) is always enabled - Ensuring multi-line function signatures end with `) {` on a separate line. [2]: https://github.com/mvdan/gofumpt#Added-rules gofumpt is stricter, but there's no lock-in. All gofumpt output is valid gofmt output, so if we decide we don't like it, it's easy to switch back without any code changes. gofumpt support is built into the tooling we use for development so this won't change development workflows. - golangci-lint includes a gofumpt check (enabled in this PR) - gopls, the LSP for Go, includes a gofumpt option (see [installation instrutions][3]) [3]: https://github.com/mvdan/gofumpt#installation This change was generated by running: ```bash gofumpt -w $(rg --files -g '*.go' | rg -v testdata | rg -v compilation_error) ``` The following files were manually tweaked afterwards: - pkg/cmd/pulumi/stack_change_secrets_provider.go: one of the lines overflowed and had comments in an inconvenient place - pkg/cmd/pulumi/destroy.go: `var x T = y` where `T` wasn't necessary - pkg/cmd/pulumi/policy_new.go: long line because of error message - pkg/backend/snapshot_test.go: long line trying to assign three variables in the same assignment I have included mention of gofumpt in the CONTRIBUTING.md.
2023-03-03 16:36:39 +00:00
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
providerB, providerBRef := makeProvider("pkg", "providerB", "1", a1.URN, a2.URN)
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
b1 := &resource.State{
URN: "b1",
Provider: providerBRef,
Dependencies: []resource.URN{a1.URN},
}
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
c1 := &resource.State{
URN: "c1",
Dependencies: []resource.URN{a2.URN},
}
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
providerD, providerDRef := makeProvider("pkg", "providerD", "2")
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
d1 := &resource.State{URN: "d1", Provider: providerDRef}
d2 := &resource.State{URN: "d2", Parent: d1.URN}
d3 := &resource.State{URN: "d3", Provider: providerDRef, DeletedWith: d1.URN}
d4 := &resource.State{URN: "d4", Parent: d2.URN}
d5 := &resource.State{URN: "d5", Parent: d3.URN}
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
e1 := &resource.State{URN: "e1"}
e2 := &resource.State{URN: "e2", Dependencies: []resource.URN{e1.URN}}
e3 := &resource.State{
URN: "e3",
PropertyDependencies: map[resource.PropertyKey][]resource.URN{
"e3Prop1": {e1.URN},
},
}
e4 := &resource.State{URN: "e4", Dependencies: []resource.URN{e3.URN}}
e5 := &resource.State{URN: "e5", DeletedWith: e3.URN}
dg := NewDependencyGraph([]*resource.State{
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
providerA,
a1,
a2,
providerB,
b1,
c1,
providerD,
d1,
d2,
d3,
d4,
d5,
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
e1,
e2,
e3,
e4,
e5,
})
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
t.Run("DependingOn", func(t *testing.T) {
t.Parallel()
// Arrange.
cases := []struct {
name string
res *resource.State
ignore map[resource.URN]bool
includeChildren bool
expected []*resource.State
}{
{
name: "providerA",
res: providerA,
ignore: nil,
includeChildren: false,
expected: []*resource.State{
a1, // a1's provider is providerA
a2, // a2's provider is providerA; a2 also depends on a1
providerB, // providerB depends on a1 and a2
b1, // b1 depends on a1 and providerB
c1, // c1 depends on a2
},
},
{
name: "a1",
res: a1,
ignore: nil,
includeChildren: false,
expected: []*resource.State{
a2, // a2 depends on a1
providerB, // providerB depends on a1 and a2
b1, // b1 depends on a1 and providerB
c1, // c1 depends on a2
},
},
{
name: "a2",
res: a2,
ignore: nil,
includeChildren: false,
expected: []*resource.State{
providerB, // providerB depends on a2
b1, // b1's provider is providerB
c1, // c1 depends on a2
},
},
{
name: "providerB",
res: providerB,
ignore: nil,
includeChildren: false,
expected: []*resource.State{
b1, // b1's provider is providerB
},
},
{
name: "b1",
res: b1,
ignore: nil,
includeChildren: false,
expected: nil,
},
{
name: "c1",
res: c1,
ignore: nil,
includeChildren: false,
expected: nil,
},
{
name: "providerA ignorning a1",
res: providerA,
ignore: map[resource.URN]bool{a1.URN: true},
includeChildren: false,
expected: []*resource.State{
a2, // a2's provider is providerA
providerB, // providerB depends on a2
b1, // b1's provider is providerB
c1, // c1 depends on a2
},
},
{
name: "providerA ignorning a2",
res: providerA,
ignore: map[resource.URN]bool{a2.URN: true},
includeChildren: false,
expected: []*resource.State{
a1, // a1's provider is providerA
providerB, // providerB depends on a1
b1, // b1's provider is providerB
},
},
{
name: "providerA ignoring a1 and a2",
res: providerA,
ignore: map[resource.URN]bool{a1.URN: true, a2.URN: true},
includeChildren: false,
expected: nil,
},
{
name: "a1 ignoring a2",
res: a1,
ignore: map[resource.URN]bool{a2.URN: true},
includeChildren: false,
expected: []*resource.State{
providerB, // providerB depends on a1
b1, // b1's provider is providerB
},
},
{
name: "a1 ignoring a2 and providerB",
res: a1,
ignore: map[resource.URN]bool{a2.URN: true, providerB.URN: true},
includeChildren: false,
expected: []*resource.State{
b1, // b1 depends on a1
},
},
{
name: "a2 ignoring providerB",
res: a2,
ignore: map[resource.URN]bool{providerB.URN: true},
includeChildren: false,
expected: []*resource.State{
c1, // c1 depends on a2
},
},
{
name: "b1 ignoring providerB",
res: b1,
ignore: map[resource.URN]bool{providerB.URN: true},
includeChildren: false,
expected: nil,
},
{
name: "providerD",
res: providerD,
ignore: nil,
includeChildren: false,
expected: []*resource.State{
d1, // d1's provider is providerD
d3, // d3's provider is providerD; d3 is deleted with d1
},
},
{
name: "providerD including parent/child relationships",
res: providerD,
ignore: nil,
includeChildren: true,
expected: []*resource.State{
d1, // d1's provider is providerD
d2, // d2 is a child of d1
d3, // d3's provider is providerD; d3 is deleted with d1
d4, // d4 is a child of d2
d5, // d5 is a child of d3
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
},
},
{
name: "providerD ignoring d1, including parent/child relationships",
res: providerD,
ignore: map[resource.URN]bool{d1.URN: true},
includeChildren: false,
expected: []*resource.State{
d3, // d3's provider is providerD
},
},
{
name: "d1",
res: d1,
ignore: nil,
includeChildren: false,
expected: []*resource.State{
d3, // d3 is deleted with d1
},
},
{
name: "d1 including parent/child relationships",
res: d1,
ignore: nil,
includeChildren: true,
expected: []*resource.State{
d2, // d2 is a child of d1
d3, // d3 is deleted with d1
d4, // d4 is a child of d2
d5, // d5 is a child of d3
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
},
},
{
name: "d1 ignoring d3",
res: d1,
ignore: map[resource.URN]bool{d3.URN: true},
includeChildren: false,
expected: nil,
},
{
name: "d2",
res: d2,
ignore: nil,
includeChildren: false,
expected: nil,
},
{
name: "e1",
res: e1,
ignore: nil,
includeChildren: false,
expected: []*resource.State{
e2, // e2 depends on e3
e3, // e3 has a property dependency on e1
e4, // e4 depends on e3
e5, // e5 is deleted with e3
},
},
{
name: "e1 ignoring e3",
res: e1,
ignore: map[resource.URN]bool{e3.URN: true},
includeChildren: false,
expected: []*resource.State{
e2, // e2 depends on e3
},
},
{
name: "e3",
res: e3,
ignore: nil,
includeChildren: false,
expected: []*resource.State{
e4, // e4 depends on e3
e5, // e5 is deleted with e3
},
},
}
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
for _, c := range cases {
c := c
t.Run(c.name, func(t *testing.T) {
t.Parallel()
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
// Act.
actual := dg.DependingOn(c.res, c.ignore, c.includeChildren)
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
// Assert.
assert.Equal(t, c.expected, actual)
})
}
})
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
t.Run("OnlyDependsOn", func(t *testing.T) {
t.Parallel()
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
// Arrange.
cases := []struct {
name string
res *resource.State
expected []*resource.State
}{}
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
for _, c := range cases {
c := c
t.Run(c.name, func(t *testing.T) {
t.Parallel()
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
// Act.
actual := dg.OnlyDependsOn(c.res)
// Assert.
assert.Equal(t, c.expected, actual)
})
}
})
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
t.Run("DependenciesOf", func(t *testing.T) {
t.Parallel()
// Arrange.
cases := []struct {
name string
res *resource.State
expected mapset.Set[*resource.State]
}{
{
name: "providerA",
res: providerA,
expected: mapset.NewSet[*resource.State](),
},
{
name: "a1",
res: a1,
expected: mapset.NewSet[*resource.State](
providerA, // a1's provider is providerA
),
},
{
name: "a2",
res: a2,
expected: mapset.NewSet[*resource.State](
providerA, // a2's provider is providerA
a1, // a2 depends on a1
),
},
{
name: "providerB",
res: providerB,
expected: mapset.NewSet[*resource.State](
a1, // providerB depends on a1
a2, // providerB depends on a2
),
},
{
name: "b1",
res: b1,
expected: mapset.NewSet[*resource.State](
providerB, // b1's provider is providerB
a1, // b1 depends on a1
),
},
{
name: "c1",
res: c1,
expected: mapset.NewSet[*resource.State](
a2, // c1 depends on a2
),
},
{
name: "providerD",
res: providerD,
expected: mapset.NewSet[*resource.State](),
},
{
name: "d1",
res: d1,
expected: mapset.NewSet[*resource.State](
providerD, // d1's provider is providerD
),
},
{
name: "d2",
res: d2,
expected: mapset.NewSet[*resource.State](
d1, // d2 is a child of d1
),
},
{
name: "d3",
res: d3,
expected: mapset.NewSet[*resource.State](
providerD, // d3's provider is providerD
d1, // d3 is deleted with d1
d2, // d2 is a child of d1
),
},
{
name: "e1",
res: e1,
expected: mapset.NewSet[*resource.State](),
},
{
name: "e2",
res: e2,
expected: mapset.NewSet[*resource.State](
e1, // e2 depends on e1
),
},
{
name: "e3",
res: e3,
expected: mapset.NewSet[*resource.State](
e1, // e3 has a property dependency on e1
),
},
{
name: "e4",
res: e4,
expected: mapset.NewSet[*resource.State](
e3, // e4 depends on e3
),
},
{
name: "e5",
res: e5,
expected: mapset.NewSet[*resource.State](
e3, // e5 is deleted with e3
),
},
}
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
for _, c := range cases {
c := c
t.Run(c.name, func(t *testing.T) {
t.Parallel()
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
// Act.
actual := dg.DependenciesOf(c.res)
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
// Assert.
if !c.expected.Equal(actual) {
assert.Failf(t, "expected and actual do not match", "expected: %v\nactual : %v", c.expected, actual)
}
})
}
})
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
t.Run("TransitiveDependenciesOf", func(t *testing.T) {
t.Parallel()
// Arrange.
cases := []struct {
name string
res *resource.State
expected mapset.Set[*resource.State]
}{
{
name: "providerA",
res: providerA,
expected: mapset.NewSet[*resource.State](),
},
{
name: "a1",
res: a1,
expected: mapset.NewSet[*resource.State](
providerA, // a1's provider is providerA
),
},
{
name: "a2",
res: a2,
expected: mapset.NewSet[*resource.State](
providerA, // a2's provider is providerA
a1, // a2 depends on a1
),
},
{
name: "providerB",
res: providerB,
expected: mapset.NewSet[*resource.State](
a1, // providerB depends on a1
a2, // providerB depends on a2
providerA, // (transitive) providerA is a1's and a2's provider
),
},
{
name: "b1",
res: b1,
expected: mapset.NewSet[*resource.State](
providerB, // b1's provider is providerB
a1, // b1 depends on a1
a2, // (transitive) providerB depends on a2
providerA, // (transitive) providerA is a1's and a2's provider
),
},
{
name: "c1",
res: c1,
expected: mapset.NewSet[*resource.State](
a2, // c1 depends on a2
providerA, // (transitive) providerA is a2's provider
a1, // (transitive) a2 depends on a1
),
},
{
name: "providerD",
res: providerD,
expected: mapset.NewSet[*resource.State](),
},
{
name: "d1",
res: d1,
expected: mapset.NewSet[*resource.State](
providerD, // d1's provider is providerD
),
},
{
name: "d2",
res: d2,
expected: mapset.NewSet[*resource.State](
d1, // d2 is a child of d1
providerD, // (transitive) d1's provider is providerD
),
},
{
name: "d3",
res: d3,
expected: mapset.NewSet[*resource.State](
providerD, // d3's provider is providerD
d1, // d3 is deleted with d1
),
},
{
name: "e1",
res: e1,
expected: mapset.NewSet[*resource.State](),
},
{
name: "e2",
res: e2,
expected: mapset.NewSet[*resource.State](
e1, // e2 depends on e1
),
},
{
name: "e3",
res: e3,
expected: mapset.NewSet[*resource.State](
e1, // e3 has a property dependency on e1
),
},
{
name: "e4",
res: e4,
expected: mapset.NewSet[*resource.State](
e3, // e4 depends on e3
e1, // (transitive) e3 has a property dependency on e1
),
},
{
name: "e5",
res: e5,
expected: mapset.NewSet[*resource.State](
e3, // e5 is deleted with e3
e1, // (transitive) e3 has a property dependency on e1
),
},
}
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
for _, c := range cases {
c := c
t.Run(c.name, func(t *testing.T) {
t.Parallel()
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
// Act.
actual := dg.TransitiveDependenciesOf(c.res)
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
// Assert.
if !c.expected.Equal(actual) {
assert.Failf(t, "expected and actual do not match", "expected: %v\nactual : %v", c.expected, actual)
}
})
}
})
State: fix panic when deleting non-unique Provider (#15322) # Description In https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/commit/30f59eb30a9b519766aa0e3d3e463a2b4667466b, we made sure that we don't delete multiple resources, when a user is prompted to choose between multiple resources with the same URN. If there are non-unique URNs, we currently assume that we can just go ahead and delete it, as there's still another resource that will fulfill the requirements. However that is not true if the dependent is a provider. Providers are identified by a {URN, ID} tuple. Therefore even though after the deletion of a provider with a specific URN there's still another one with the same URN left, this is not good enough to fulfill the dependency requirements. If we don't have a unique URN, check again to make sure there's no provider dependency on the condemned resource. If there is one, we either error out, or delete the dependencies depending on the options passed in. Note that I haven't managed to reproduce this by just issuing pulumi commands, but I did by editing the state in a way to reproduce the same issue. One unanswered question for me is how the deleted cluster in the original issue ended up lingering in the state. While this PR fixes the panic, and will make it easier for the user to actually delete the cluster from the state (it's going to suggest `--target-dependents` which will do the right thing), it doesn't address that bit. Fixes https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/issues/15166 ## Checklist - [x] I have run `make tidy` to update any new dependencies - [x] I have run `make lint` to verify my code passes the lint check - [x] I have formatted my code using `gofumpt` <!--- Please provide details if the checkbox below is to be left unchecked. --> - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works <!--- User-facing changes require a CHANGELOG entry. --> - [x] I have run `make changelog` and committed the `changelog/pending/<file>` documenting my change <!-- If the change(s) in this PR is a modification of an existing call to the Pulumi Cloud, then the service should honor older versions of the CLI where this change would not exist. You must then bump the API version in /pkg/backend/httpstate/client/api.go, as well as add it to the service. --> - [ ] Yes, there are changes in this PR that warrants bumping the Pulumi Cloud API version <!-- @Pulumi employees: If yes, you must submit corresponding changes in the service repo. --> --------- Co-authored-by: Fraser Waters <fraser@pulumi.com>
2024-02-05 16:21:38 +00:00
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
providerF1, providerF1Ref := makeProvider("pkg", "providerF", "3")
providerF2, providerF2Ref := makeProvider("pkg", "providerF", "4")
providerF3, providerF3Ref := makeProvider("pkg", "providerF", "5")
State: fix panic when deleting non-unique Provider (#15322) # Description In https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/commit/30f59eb30a9b519766aa0e3d3e463a2b4667466b, we made sure that we don't delete multiple resources, when a user is prompted to choose between multiple resources with the same URN. If there are non-unique URNs, we currently assume that we can just go ahead and delete it, as there's still another resource that will fulfill the requirements. However that is not true if the dependent is a provider. Providers are identified by a {URN, ID} tuple. Therefore even though after the deletion of a provider with a specific URN there's still another one with the same URN left, this is not good enough to fulfill the dependency requirements. If we don't have a unique URN, check again to make sure there's no provider dependency on the condemned resource. If there is one, we either error out, or delete the dependencies depending on the options passed in. Note that I haven't managed to reproduce this by just issuing pulumi commands, but I did by editing the state in a way to reproduce the same issue. One unanswered question for me is how the deleted cluster in the original issue ended up lingering in the state. While this PR fixes the panic, and will make it easier for the user to actually delete the cluster from the state (it's going to suggest `--target-dependents` which will do the right thing), it doesn't address that bit. Fixes https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/issues/15166 ## Checklist - [x] I have run `make tidy` to update any new dependencies - [x] I have run `make lint` to verify my code passes the lint check - [x] I have formatted my code using `gofumpt` <!--- Please provide details if the checkbox below is to be left unchecked. --> - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works <!--- User-facing changes require a CHANGELOG entry. --> - [x] I have run `make changelog` and committed the `changelog/pending/<file>` documenting my change <!-- If the change(s) in this PR is a modification of an existing call to the Pulumi Cloud, then the service should honor older versions of the CLI where this change would not exist. You must then bump the API version in /pkg/backend/httpstate/client/api.go, as well as add it to the service. --> - [ ] Yes, there are changes in this PR that warrants bumping the Pulumi Cloud API version <!-- @Pulumi employees: If yes, you must submit corresponding changes in the service repo. --> --------- Co-authored-by: Fraser Waters <fraser@pulumi.com>
2024-02-05 16:21:38 +00:00
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
fx1 := &resource.State{URN: "fx", Provider: providerF1Ref}
fx2 := &resource.State{URN: "fx", Provider: providerF2Ref}
State: fix panic when deleting non-unique Provider (#15322) # Description In https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/commit/30f59eb30a9b519766aa0e3d3e463a2b4667466b, we made sure that we don't delete multiple resources, when a user is prompted to choose between multiple resources with the same URN. If there are non-unique URNs, we currently assume that we can just go ahead and delete it, as there's still another resource that will fulfill the requirements. However that is not true if the dependent is a provider. Providers are identified by a {URN, ID} tuple. Therefore even though after the deletion of a provider with a specific URN there's still another one with the same URN left, this is not good enough to fulfill the dependency requirements. If we don't have a unique URN, check again to make sure there's no provider dependency on the condemned resource. If there is one, we either error out, or delete the dependencies depending on the options passed in. Note that I haven't managed to reproduce this by just issuing pulumi commands, but I did by editing the state in a way to reproduce the same issue. One unanswered question for me is how the deleted cluster in the original issue ended up lingering in the state. While this PR fixes the panic, and will make it easier for the user to actually delete the cluster from the state (it's going to suggest `--target-dependents` which will do the right thing), it doesn't address that bit. Fixes https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/issues/15166 ## Checklist - [x] I have run `make tidy` to update any new dependencies - [x] I have run `make lint` to verify my code passes the lint check - [x] I have formatted my code using `gofumpt` <!--- Please provide details if the checkbox below is to be left unchecked. --> - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works <!--- User-facing changes require a CHANGELOG entry. --> - [x] I have run `make changelog` and committed the `changelog/pending/<file>` documenting my change <!-- If the change(s) in this PR is a modification of an existing call to the Pulumi Cloud, then the service should honor older versions of the CLI where this change would not exist. You must then bump the API version in /pkg/backend/httpstate/client/api.go, as well as add it to the service. --> - [ ] Yes, there are changes in this PR that warrants bumping the Pulumi Cloud API version <!-- @Pulumi employees: If yes, you must submit corresponding changes in the service repo. --> --------- Co-authored-by: Fraser Waters <fraser@pulumi.com>
2024-02-05 16:21:38 +00:00
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
fy := &resource.State{URN: "fy", Provider: providerF3Ref, Dependencies: []resource.URN{fx1.URN}}
fz := &resource.State{
URN: "fz",
Provider: providerF3Ref,
PropertyDependencies: map[resource.PropertyKey][]resource.URN{
"fzProp1": {fx1.URN},
},
}
State: fix panic when deleting non-unique Provider (#15322) # Description In https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/commit/30f59eb30a9b519766aa0e3d3e463a2b4667466b, we made sure that we don't delete multiple resources, when a user is prompted to choose between multiple resources with the same URN. If there are non-unique URNs, we currently assume that we can just go ahead and delete it, as there's still another resource that will fulfill the requirements. However that is not true if the dependent is a provider. Providers are identified by a {URN, ID} tuple. Therefore even though after the deletion of a provider with a specific URN there's still another one with the same URN left, this is not good enough to fulfill the dependency requirements. If we don't have a unique URN, check again to make sure there's no provider dependency on the condemned resource. If there is one, we either error out, or delete the dependencies depending on the options passed in. Note that I haven't managed to reproduce this by just issuing pulumi commands, but I did by editing the state in a way to reproduce the same issue. One unanswered question for me is how the deleted cluster in the original issue ended up lingering in the state. While this PR fixes the panic, and will make it easier for the user to actually delete the cluster from the state (it's going to suggest `--target-dependents` which will do the right thing), it doesn't address that bit. Fixes https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/issues/15166 ## Checklist - [x] I have run `make tidy` to update any new dependencies - [x] I have run `make lint` to verify my code passes the lint check - [x] I have formatted my code using `gofumpt` <!--- Please provide details if the checkbox below is to be left unchecked. --> - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works <!--- User-facing changes require a CHANGELOG entry. --> - [x] I have run `make changelog` and committed the `changelog/pending/<file>` documenting my change <!-- If the change(s) in this PR is a modification of an existing call to the Pulumi Cloud, then the service should honor older versions of the CLI where this change would not exist. You must then bump the API version in /pkg/backend/httpstate/client/api.go, as well as add it to the service. --> - [ ] Yes, there are changes in this PR that warrants bumping the Pulumi Cloud API version <!-- @Pulumi employees: If yes, you must submit corresponding changes in the service repo. --> --------- Co-authored-by: Fraser Waters <fraser@pulumi.com>
2024-02-05 16:21:38 +00:00
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
fw := &resource.State{
URN: "fw",
Provider: providerF3Ref,
DeletedWith: fx1.URN,
}
State: fix panic when deleting non-unique Provider (#15322) # Description In https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/commit/30f59eb30a9b519766aa0e3d3e463a2b4667466b, we made sure that we don't delete multiple resources, when a user is prompted to choose between multiple resources with the same URN. If there are non-unique URNs, we currently assume that we can just go ahead and delete it, as there's still another resource that will fulfill the requirements. However that is not true if the dependent is a provider. Providers are identified by a {URN, ID} tuple. Therefore even though after the deletion of a provider with a specific URN there's still another one with the same URN left, this is not good enough to fulfill the dependency requirements. If we don't have a unique URN, check again to make sure there's no provider dependency on the condemned resource. If there is one, we either error out, or delete the dependencies depending on the options passed in. Note that I haven't managed to reproduce this by just issuing pulumi commands, but I did by editing the state in a way to reproduce the same issue. One unanswered question for me is how the deleted cluster in the original issue ended up lingering in the state. While this PR fixes the panic, and will make it easier for the user to actually delete the cluster from the state (it's going to suggest `--target-dependents` which will do the right thing), it doesn't address that bit. Fixes https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/issues/15166 ## Checklist - [x] I have run `make tidy` to update any new dependencies - [x] I have run `make lint` to verify my code passes the lint check - [x] I have formatted my code using `gofumpt` <!--- Please provide details if the checkbox below is to be left unchecked. --> - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works <!--- User-facing changes require a CHANGELOG entry. --> - [x] I have run `make changelog` and committed the `changelog/pending/<file>` documenting my change <!-- If the change(s) in this PR is a modification of an existing call to the Pulumi Cloud, then the service should honor older versions of the CLI where this change would not exist. You must then bump the API version in /pkg/backend/httpstate/client/api.go, as well as add it to the service. --> - [ ] Yes, there are changes in this PR that warrants bumping the Pulumi Cloud API version <!-- @Pulumi employees: If yes, you must submit corresponding changes in the service repo. --> --------- Co-authored-by: Fraser Waters <fraser@pulumi.com>
2024-02-05 16:21:38 +00:00
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
dgOnly := NewDependencyGraph([]*resource.State{
providerF1,
providerF2,
providerF3,
fx1,
fx2,
fy,
fz,
fw,
State: fix panic when deleting non-unique Provider (#15322) # Description In https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/commit/30f59eb30a9b519766aa0e3d3e463a2b4667466b, we made sure that we don't delete multiple resources, when a user is prompted to choose between multiple resources with the same URN. If there are non-unique URNs, we currently assume that we can just go ahead and delete it, as there's still another resource that will fulfill the requirements. However that is not true if the dependent is a provider. Providers are identified by a {URN, ID} tuple. Therefore even though after the deletion of a provider with a specific URN there's still another one with the same URN left, this is not good enough to fulfill the dependency requirements. If we don't have a unique URN, check again to make sure there's no provider dependency on the condemned resource. If there is one, we either error out, or delete the dependencies depending on the options passed in. Note that I haven't managed to reproduce this by just issuing pulumi commands, but I did by editing the state in a way to reproduce the same issue. One unanswered question for me is how the deleted cluster in the original issue ended up lingering in the state. While this PR fixes the panic, and will make it easier for the user to actually delete the cluster from the state (it's going to suggest `--target-dependents` which will do the right thing), it doesn't address that bit. Fixes https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/issues/15166 ## Checklist - [x] I have run `make tidy` to update any new dependencies - [x] I have run `make lint` to verify my code passes the lint check - [x] I have formatted my code using `gofumpt` <!--- Please provide details if the checkbox below is to be left unchecked. --> - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works <!--- User-facing changes require a CHANGELOG entry. --> - [x] I have run `make changelog` and committed the `changelog/pending/<file>` documenting my change <!-- If the change(s) in this PR is a modification of an existing call to the Pulumi Cloud, then the service should honor older versions of the CLI where this change would not exist. You must then bump the API version in /pkg/backend/httpstate/client/api.go, as well as add it to the service. --> - [ ] Yes, there are changes in this PR that warrants bumping the Pulumi Cloud API version <!-- @Pulumi employees: If yes, you must submit corresponding changes in the service repo. --> --------- Co-authored-by: Fraser Waters <fraser@pulumi.com>
2024-02-05 16:21:38 +00:00
})
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
t.Run("OnlyDependsOn", func(t *testing.T) {
t.Parallel()
// Arrange.
cases := []struct {
name string
res *resource.State
expected []*resource.State
}{
{
name: "providerF1",
res: providerF1,
expected: []*resource.State{
fx1,
},
},
{
name: "providerF2",
res: providerF2,
expected: []*resource.State{
fx2,
},
},
{
name: "providerF3",
res: providerF3,
expected: []*resource.State{
fy,
fz,
fw,
},
},
{
name: "fx1",
res: fx1,
expected: nil,
},
{
name: "fx2",
res: fx2,
expected: nil,
},
{
name: "fy1",
res: fy,
expected: nil,
},
}
State: fix panic when deleting non-unique Provider (#15322) # Description In https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/commit/30f59eb30a9b519766aa0e3d3e463a2b4667466b, we made sure that we don't delete multiple resources, when a user is prompted to choose between multiple resources with the same URN. If there are non-unique URNs, we currently assume that we can just go ahead and delete it, as there's still another resource that will fulfill the requirements. However that is not true if the dependent is a provider. Providers are identified by a {URN, ID} tuple. Therefore even though after the deletion of a provider with a specific URN there's still another one with the same URN left, this is not good enough to fulfill the dependency requirements. If we don't have a unique URN, check again to make sure there's no provider dependency on the condemned resource. If there is one, we either error out, or delete the dependencies depending on the options passed in. Note that I haven't managed to reproduce this by just issuing pulumi commands, but I did by editing the state in a way to reproduce the same issue. One unanswered question for me is how the deleted cluster in the original issue ended up lingering in the state. While this PR fixes the panic, and will make it easier for the user to actually delete the cluster from the state (it's going to suggest `--target-dependents` which will do the right thing), it doesn't address that bit. Fixes https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/issues/15166 ## Checklist - [x] I have run `make tidy` to update any new dependencies - [x] I have run `make lint` to verify my code passes the lint check - [x] I have formatted my code using `gofumpt` <!--- Please provide details if the checkbox below is to be left unchecked. --> - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works <!--- User-facing changes require a CHANGELOG entry. --> - [x] I have run `make changelog` and committed the `changelog/pending/<file>` documenting my change <!-- If the change(s) in this PR is a modification of an existing call to the Pulumi Cloud, then the service should honor older versions of the CLI where this change would not exist. You must then bump the API version in /pkg/backend/httpstate/client/api.go, as well as add it to the service. --> - [ ] Yes, there are changes in this PR that warrants bumping the Pulumi Cloud API version <!-- @Pulumi employees: If yes, you must submit corresponding changes in the service repo. --> --------- Co-authored-by: Fraser Waters <fraser@pulumi.com>
2024-02-05 16:21:38 +00:00
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
for _, c := range cases {
c := c
t.Run(c.name, func(t *testing.T) {
t.Parallel()
State: fix panic when deleting non-unique Provider (#15322) # Description In https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/commit/30f59eb30a9b519766aa0e3d3e463a2b4667466b, we made sure that we don't delete multiple resources, when a user is prompted to choose between multiple resources with the same URN. If there are non-unique URNs, we currently assume that we can just go ahead and delete it, as there's still another resource that will fulfill the requirements. However that is not true if the dependent is a provider. Providers are identified by a {URN, ID} tuple. Therefore even though after the deletion of a provider with a specific URN there's still another one with the same URN left, this is not good enough to fulfill the dependency requirements. If we don't have a unique URN, check again to make sure there's no provider dependency on the condemned resource. If there is one, we either error out, or delete the dependencies depending on the options passed in. Note that I haven't managed to reproduce this by just issuing pulumi commands, but I did by editing the state in a way to reproduce the same issue. One unanswered question for me is how the deleted cluster in the original issue ended up lingering in the state. While this PR fixes the panic, and will make it easier for the user to actually delete the cluster from the state (it's going to suggest `--target-dependents` which will do the right thing), it doesn't address that bit. Fixes https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/issues/15166 ## Checklist - [x] I have run `make tidy` to update any new dependencies - [x] I have run `make lint` to verify my code passes the lint check - [x] I have formatted my code using `gofumpt` <!--- Please provide details if the checkbox below is to be left unchecked. --> - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works <!--- User-facing changes require a CHANGELOG entry. --> - [x] I have run `make changelog` and committed the `changelog/pending/<file>` documenting my change <!-- If the change(s) in this PR is a modification of an existing call to the Pulumi Cloud, then the service should honor older versions of the CLI where this change would not exist. You must then bump the API version in /pkg/backend/httpstate/client/api.go, as well as add it to the service. --> - [ ] Yes, there are changes in this PR that warrants bumping the Pulumi Cloud API version <!-- @Pulumi employees: If yes, you must submit corresponding changes in the service repo. --> --------- Co-authored-by: Fraser Waters <fraser@pulumi.com>
2024-02-05 16:21:38 +00:00
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
// Act.
actual := dgOnly.OnlyDependsOn(c.res)
State: fix panic when deleting non-unique Provider (#15322) # Description In https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/commit/30f59eb30a9b519766aa0e3d3e463a2b4667466b, we made sure that we don't delete multiple resources, when a user is prompted to choose between multiple resources with the same URN. If there are non-unique URNs, we currently assume that we can just go ahead and delete it, as there's still another resource that will fulfill the requirements. However that is not true if the dependent is a provider. Providers are identified by a {URN, ID} tuple. Therefore even though after the deletion of a provider with a specific URN there's still another one with the same URN left, this is not good enough to fulfill the dependency requirements. If we don't have a unique URN, check again to make sure there's no provider dependency on the condemned resource. If there is one, we either error out, or delete the dependencies depending on the options passed in. Note that I haven't managed to reproduce this by just issuing pulumi commands, but I did by editing the state in a way to reproduce the same issue. One unanswered question for me is how the deleted cluster in the original issue ended up lingering in the state. While this PR fixes the panic, and will make it easier for the user to actually delete the cluster from the state (it's going to suggest `--target-dependents` which will do the right thing), it doesn't address that bit. Fixes https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/issues/15166 ## Checklist - [x] I have run `make tidy` to update any new dependencies - [x] I have run `make lint` to verify my code passes the lint check - [x] I have formatted my code using `gofumpt` <!--- Please provide details if the checkbox below is to be left unchecked. --> - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works <!--- User-facing changes require a CHANGELOG entry. --> - [x] I have run `make changelog` and committed the `changelog/pending/<file>` documenting my change <!-- If the change(s) in this PR is a modification of an existing call to the Pulumi Cloud, then the service should honor older versions of the CLI where this change would not exist. You must then bump the API version in /pkg/backend/httpstate/client/api.go, as well as add it to the service. --> - [ ] Yes, there are changes in this PR that warrants bumping the Pulumi Cloud API version <!-- @Pulumi employees: If yes, you must submit corresponding changes in the service repo. --> --------- Co-authored-by: Fraser Waters <fraser@pulumi.com>
2024-02-05 16:21:38 +00:00
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
// Assert.
assert.Equal(t, c.expected, actual)
})
}
})
t.Run("ParentsOf", func(t *testing.T) {
t.Parallel()
// Arrange.
cases := []struct {
name string
res *resource.State
expected []*resource.State
}{
{
name: "e2",
res: e2,
expected: []*resource.State{},
},
{
name: "d2",
res: d2,
expected: []*resource.State{d1},
},
{
name: "d4",
res: d4,
expected: []*resource.State{d2, d1},
},
{
name: "d5",
res: d5,
expected: []*resource.State{d3},
},
}
for _, c := range cases {
c := c
t.Run(c.name, func(t *testing.T) {
t.Parallel()
// Act.
actual := dg.ParentsOf(c.res)
// Assert.
assert.Equal(t, c.expected, actual)
})
}
})
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
}
State: fix panic when deleting non-unique Provider (#15322) # Description In https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/commit/30f59eb30a9b519766aa0e3d3e463a2b4667466b, we made sure that we don't delete multiple resources, when a user is prompted to choose between multiple resources with the same URN. If there are non-unique URNs, we currently assume that we can just go ahead and delete it, as there's still another resource that will fulfill the requirements. However that is not true if the dependent is a provider. Providers are identified by a {URN, ID} tuple. Therefore even though after the deletion of a provider with a specific URN there's still another one with the same URN left, this is not good enough to fulfill the dependency requirements. If we don't have a unique URN, check again to make sure there's no provider dependency on the condemned resource. If there is one, we either error out, or delete the dependencies depending on the options passed in. Note that I haven't managed to reproduce this by just issuing pulumi commands, but I did by editing the state in a way to reproduce the same issue. One unanswered question for me is how the deleted cluster in the original issue ended up lingering in the state. While this PR fixes the panic, and will make it easier for the user to actually delete the cluster from the state (it's going to suggest `--target-dependents` which will do the right thing), it doesn't address that bit. Fixes https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/issues/15166 ## Checklist - [x] I have run `make tidy` to update any new dependencies - [x] I have run `make lint` to verify my code passes the lint check - [x] I have formatted my code using `gofumpt` <!--- Please provide details if the checkbox below is to be left unchecked. --> - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works <!--- User-facing changes require a CHANGELOG entry. --> - [x] I have run `make changelog` and committed the `changelog/pending/<file>` documenting my change <!-- If the change(s) in this PR is a modification of an existing call to the Pulumi Cloud, then the service should honor older versions of the CLI where this change would not exist. You must then bump the API version in /pkg/backend/httpstate/client/api.go, as well as add it to the service. --> - [ ] Yes, there are changes in this PR that warrants bumping the Pulumi Cloud API version <!-- @Pulumi employees: If yes, you must submit corresponding changes in the service repo. --> --------- Co-authored-by: Fraser Waters <fraser@pulumi.com>
2024-02-05 16:21:38 +00:00
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
func makeProvider(pkg, name, id string, deps ...resource.URN) (*resource.State, string) {
t := providers.MakeProviderType(tokens.Package(pkg))
State: fix panic when deleting non-unique Provider (#15322) # Description In https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/commit/30f59eb30a9b519766aa0e3d3e463a2b4667466b, we made sure that we don't delete multiple resources, when a user is prompted to choose between multiple resources with the same URN. If there are non-unique URNs, we currently assume that we can just go ahead and delete it, as there's still another resource that will fulfill the requirements. However that is not true if the dependent is a provider. Providers are identified by a {URN, ID} tuple. Therefore even though after the deletion of a provider with a specific URN there's still another one with the same URN left, this is not good enough to fulfill the dependency requirements. If we don't have a unique URN, check again to make sure there's no provider dependency on the condemned resource. If there is one, we either error out, or delete the dependencies depending on the options passed in. Note that I haven't managed to reproduce this by just issuing pulumi commands, but I did by editing the state in a way to reproduce the same issue. One unanswered question for me is how the deleted cluster in the original issue ended up lingering in the state. While this PR fixes the panic, and will make it easier for the user to actually delete the cluster from the state (it's going to suggest `--target-dependents` which will do the right thing), it doesn't address that bit. Fixes https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/issues/15166 ## Checklist - [x] I have run `make tidy` to update any new dependencies - [x] I have run `make lint` to verify my code passes the lint check - [x] I have formatted my code using `gofumpt` <!--- Please provide details if the checkbox below is to be left unchecked. --> - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works <!--- User-facing changes require a CHANGELOG entry. --> - [x] I have run `make changelog` and committed the `changelog/pending/<file>` documenting my change <!-- If the change(s) in this PR is a modification of an existing call to the Pulumi Cloud, then the service should honor older versions of the CLI where this change would not exist. You must then bump the API version in /pkg/backend/httpstate/client/api.go, as well as add it to the service. --> - [ ] Yes, there are changes in this PR that warrants bumping the Pulumi Cloud API version <!-- @Pulumi employees: If yes, you must submit corresponding changes in the service repo. --> --------- Co-authored-by: Fraser Waters <fraser@pulumi.com>
2024-02-05 16:21:38 +00:00
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
provider := &resource.State{
Type: t,
URN: resource.NewURN("stack", "proj", "", t, name),
ID: resource.ID(id),
Inputs: resource.PropertyMap{},
Outputs: resource.PropertyMap{},
Dependencies: deps,
}
State: fix panic when deleting non-unique Provider (#15322) # Description In https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/commit/30f59eb30a9b519766aa0e3d3e463a2b4667466b, we made sure that we don't delete multiple resources, when a user is prompted to choose between multiple resources with the same URN. If there are non-unique URNs, we currently assume that we can just go ahead and delete it, as there's still another resource that will fulfill the requirements. However that is not true if the dependent is a provider. Providers are identified by a {URN, ID} tuple. Therefore even though after the deletion of a provider with a specific URN there's still another one with the same URN left, this is not good enough to fulfill the dependency requirements. If we don't have a unique URN, check again to make sure there's no provider dependency on the condemned resource. If there is one, we either error out, or delete the dependencies depending on the options passed in. Note that I haven't managed to reproduce this by just issuing pulumi commands, but I did by editing the state in a way to reproduce the same issue. One unanswered question for me is how the deleted cluster in the original issue ended up lingering in the state. While this PR fixes the panic, and will make it easier for the user to actually delete the cluster from the state (it's going to suggest `--target-dependents` which will do the right thing), it doesn't address that bit. Fixes https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/issues/15166 ## Checklist - [x] I have run `make tidy` to update any new dependencies - [x] I have run `make lint` to verify my code passes the lint check - [x] I have formatted my code using `gofumpt` <!--- Please provide details if the checkbox below is to be left unchecked. --> - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works <!--- User-facing changes require a CHANGELOG entry. --> - [x] I have run `make changelog` and committed the `changelog/pending/<file>` documenting my change <!-- If the change(s) in this PR is a modification of an existing call to the Pulumi Cloud, then the service should honor older versions of the CLI where this change would not exist. You must then bump the API version in /pkg/backend/httpstate/client/api.go, as well as add it to the service. --> - [ ] Yes, there are changes in this PR that warrants bumping the Pulumi Cloud API version <!-- @Pulumi employees: If yes, you must submit corresponding changes in the service repo. --> --------- Co-authored-by: Fraser Waters <fraser@pulumi.com>
2024-02-05 16:21:38 +00:00
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
providerRef, err := providers.NewReference(provider.URN, provider.ID)
if err != nil {
panic(err)
}
State: fix panic when deleting non-unique Provider (#15322) # Description In https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/commit/30f59eb30a9b519766aa0e3d3e463a2b4667466b, we made sure that we don't delete multiple resources, when a user is prompted to choose between multiple resources with the same URN. If there are non-unique URNs, we currently assume that we can just go ahead and delete it, as there's still another resource that will fulfill the requirements. However that is not true if the dependent is a provider. Providers are identified by a {URN, ID} tuple. Therefore even though after the deletion of a provider with a specific URN there's still another one with the same URN left, this is not good enough to fulfill the dependency requirements. If we don't have a unique URN, check again to make sure there's no provider dependency on the condemned resource. If there is one, we either error out, or delete the dependencies depending on the options passed in. Note that I haven't managed to reproduce this by just issuing pulumi commands, but I did by editing the state in a way to reproduce the same issue. One unanswered question for me is how the deleted cluster in the original issue ended up lingering in the state. While this PR fixes the panic, and will make it easier for the user to actually delete the cluster from the state (it's going to suggest `--target-dependents` which will do the right thing), it doesn't address that bit. Fixes https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/issues/15166 ## Checklist - [x] I have run `make tidy` to update any new dependencies - [x] I have run `make lint` to verify my code passes the lint check - [x] I have formatted my code using `gofumpt` <!--- Please provide details if the checkbox below is to be left unchecked. --> - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works <!--- User-facing changes require a CHANGELOG entry. --> - [x] I have run `make changelog` and committed the `changelog/pending/<file>` documenting my change <!-- If the change(s) in this PR is a modification of an existing call to the Pulumi Cloud, then the service should honor older versions of the CLI where this change would not exist. You must then bump the API version in /pkg/backend/httpstate/client/api.go, as well as add it to the service. --> - [ ] Yes, there are changes in this PR that warrants bumping the Pulumi Cloud API version <!-- @Pulumi employees: If yes, you must submit corresponding changes in the service repo. --> --------- Co-authored-by: Fraser Waters <fraser@pulumi.com>
2024-02-05 16:21:38 +00:00
Better handle property dependencies and `deletedWith` (#16088) A resource `A` depends on a resource `B` if: 1. `B` is `A`'s `Provider`. 2. `B` is `A`'s `Parent`. 3. `B` appears in `A`'s `Dependencies`. 4. `B` appears in one or more of `A`'s `PropertyDependencies`. 5. `B` is referenced by `A`'s `DeletedWith` field. While cases 1, 2, and 3 (providers, parents, and dependencies) are handled fairly consistently, there have been a number of cases where the newer features of `PropertyDependencies` (case 4) and `DeletedWith` (case 5) have been neglected. This commit addresses some of these omissions. Specifically: * When refreshing state, it's important that we remove URNs that point to resources that we've identified as deleted. Presently we check pointers to parents and dependencies, but not property dependencies or `deletedWith`. This commit fixes these gaps where dangling URNs could lurk. * Linked to the above, this commit extends snapshot integrity checks to include property dependencies and `deletedWith`. Some tests that previously used now invalid states have to be repaired or removed as a result of this. * Fixing snapshot integrity checking reveals that dependency graph checks also fail to consider property dependencies and `deletedWith`. This probably hasn't bitten us since property dependencies are currently rolled up into dependencies (for temporary backwards compatibility) and `deletedWith` is typically an optimisation (moreover, one that only matters during deletes), so operations being parallelised due a perceived lack of dependency still succeed. However, tests that previously passed now fail as we can spot these races with our better integrity checks. This commit thus fixes up dependency graph construction and bulks out its test suite to cover the new cases. These bugs were discovered as part of the investigation into #16052, though they may not be directly responsible for it (though the issues with dependency graphs are certainly a candidate).
2024-05-03 17:08:06 +00:00
return provider, providerRef.String()
State: fix panic when deleting non-unique Provider (#15322) # Description In https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/commit/30f59eb30a9b519766aa0e3d3e463a2b4667466b, we made sure that we don't delete multiple resources, when a user is prompted to choose between multiple resources with the same URN. If there are non-unique URNs, we currently assume that we can just go ahead and delete it, as there's still another resource that will fulfill the requirements. However that is not true if the dependent is a provider. Providers are identified by a {URN, ID} tuple. Therefore even though after the deletion of a provider with a specific URN there's still another one with the same URN left, this is not good enough to fulfill the dependency requirements. If we don't have a unique URN, check again to make sure there's no provider dependency on the condemned resource. If there is one, we either error out, or delete the dependencies depending on the options passed in. Note that I haven't managed to reproduce this by just issuing pulumi commands, but I did by editing the state in a way to reproduce the same issue. One unanswered question for me is how the deleted cluster in the original issue ended up lingering in the state. While this PR fixes the panic, and will make it easier for the user to actually delete the cluster from the state (it's going to suggest `--target-dependents` which will do the right thing), it doesn't address that bit. Fixes https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/issues/15166 ## Checklist - [x] I have run `make tidy` to update any new dependencies - [x] I have run `make lint` to verify my code passes the lint check - [x] I have formatted my code using `gofumpt` <!--- Please provide details if the checkbox below is to be left unchecked. --> - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works <!--- User-facing changes require a CHANGELOG entry. --> - [x] I have run `make changelog` and committed the `changelog/pending/<file>` documenting my change <!-- If the change(s) in this PR is a modification of an existing call to the Pulumi Cloud, then the service should honor older versions of the CLI where this change would not exist. You must then bump the API version in /pkg/backend/httpstate/client/api.go, as well as add it to the service. --> - [ ] Yes, there are changes in this PR that warrants bumping the Pulumi Cloud API version <!-- @Pulumi employees: If yes, you must submit corresponding changes in the service repo. --> --------- Co-authored-by: Fraser Waters <fraser@pulumi.com>
2024-02-05 16:21:38 +00:00
}