3 ms·
The Terraform provider hard-codes delay_hours to zero. We can't know if this was TF-initiated (I agree with the general sentiment here re: the usefulness of for
by smcwhtdtmc 2y ago
The Terraform provider hard-codes delay_hours to zero. We can't know if this was TF-initiated (I agree with the general sentiment here re: the usefulness of forensic analysis). But if it was, the TF provider bypasses an important safety mechanism.
https://github.com/hashicorp/terraform-provider-google/blob/b956f357e58360a4d09372b4fe0fc83560b6e26f/google/services/vmwareengine/resource_vmwareengine_private_cloud.go#L631 https://github.com/hashicorp/terraform-provider-google/blob/...
- dantiberian 2y agoThanks for pointing that out. I had a look at the Terraform provider but missed that delayHours was hardcoded to 0. I’ll update the article.
- smcwhtdtmc 2y agoYou're welcome! Your article taught me exactly what to go looking for. While we're at it, it also looks like the provider couldn't provision stretched clusters at all until mid-April. I don't know what I think this means for the theory presented in the article. Maybe Uni was new to TF (or even actively onboarding) and paid the beginner's tax? TF is great at turning beginner mistakes into "you deleted your infra." It's an uncomfortable amount of speculation, but it's plausible. Relevant discussion is on https://github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/magic-modules/pull/10443 https://github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/magic-modules/pull/10... and relevant code changes are on https://github.com/hashicorp/terraform-provider-google/pull/17875 https://github.com/hashicorp/terraform-provider-google/pull/...