wide-jackal-86020
05/07/2021, 1:00 PMarn:aws:sts::228886564947:assumed-role/AmazonLightsailInstanceRole/i-04f5fe371a036054d
seems to be an account that running the light sail, It's even not my account. I am running the deployment on a light sail instance. My understanding is instance role is of lower priority than the configuration in the .aws
folder. What makes the project on the right side to choose the instance role?wide-jackal-86020
05/07/2021, 1:03 PMcuddly-pharmacist-11587
05/07/2021, 2:20 PMRuntimeWarning: coroutine 'invoke.<locals>.do_rpc' was never awaited
Here's the question on stackoverflow, in case anyone has an answer or suggestion as to what I'm doing wrong here: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/67335936/how-do-you-write-a-pulumi-provider-that-makes-a-rest-api-request-in-pytyonchilly-computer-89246
05/07/2021, 8:05 PMminiature-advantage-31279
05/08/2021, 7:38 AM<https://www.pulumi.com/docs/guides/crosswalk/aws/elb/>
# what is the equivalent code for existing ALB?
const alb = new awsx.lb.ApplicationLoadBalancer("web-traffic");
clever-lawyer-94920
05/09/2021, 11:08 AMephemeral containers
in a kubernetes cluster created using eks?boundless-byte-83231
05/10/2021, 12:47 AMboundless-byte-83231
05/10/2021, 12:48 AMglamorous-tailor-34913
05/10/2021, 4:53 AMbusy-honey-73811
05/10/2021, 12:29 PMdangling
Pulumi resources in my (TypeScript) stacks, resources which are created but not used as input to any other resource and which are neither added to any output nor returned from the main inline function (using the automation api). Looking at many Pulumi examples this seems to be a common pattern. Think of something like this:
function createBucket() {
// Create AWS S3 Bucket but do neither output nor return it. It is also not used
// as input to any other resource.
new Bucket("myBucket", {...});
}
However, rather often I observe that such resources are not created on first stack deployment resp. are delete on later stack updates. It looks like it depends on some “race condition” (timing issue) whether those resources are registered by the Pulumi runtime or not. Usually adding such dangling
resources as dependency to another resource (using dependsOn
), or alternatively making it a stack output resp. returning it from the main inline function resolves that (racy) problem.
Now I am wondering, is this expected behaviour when using Pulumi with TypeScript/NodeJs or is this a bug in Pulumi?billowy-laptop-45963
05/10/2021, 4:29 PMnutritious-battery-42762
05/10/2021, 4:37 PMlittle-cartoon-10569
05/11/2021, 3:02 AMbillowy-laptop-45963
05/11/2021, 3:18 AMbillowy-laptop-45963
05/11/2021, 3:27 AMimportant-leather-51045
05/11/2021, 4:08 AMproud-art-41399
05/11/2021, 6:32 AMripe-room-94618
05/11/2021, 8:24 AMboundless-angle-56560
05/11/2021, 1:12 PMworried-boots-97291
05/11/2021, 1:37 PMred-football-97286
05/11/2021, 3:06 PMripe-knife-11053
05/11/2021, 4:27 PMmany-psychiatrist-74327
05/11/2021, 5:39 PMinfra
exports a kubeconfig
for a kubernetes cluster (and it’s a secret), and my project services
reads it, creates a k8s.Provider
and uses that to provision my services in the cluster.
I cannot use StackReference.getOutputValue()
because the output is a secret. If I use StackReference.getOutput()
, then I have to do Output.apply()
to transform it into a Output<k8s.Provider>
. But the k8s resources only takes `k8s.Provider`s, not `Output<k8s.Provider>`s…
so.. I guess one option is to put everything inside the apply()
call.. but that’s undesirable. I’m wondering if there’s a cleaner waybroad-helmet-79436
05/11/2021, 6:06 PMpulumi up
I tried to both
1. rename a resource using aliases
2. make a change to that same resource which caused it to be replace
d
This failed with pending_operations
in the state file because I ended up with two different resources with the same alias at the same time.
I guess the GCP and Kubernetes providers perform a replace
by first creating the new resource and then deleting the old one?
If so, I believe this will hit any resource which has any aliases
defined, i.e., you don’t necessarily have to rename the resource at the same time as replacing it.
I tried reproducing it in a local stack using the @pulumi/random
provider, but I think that one replaces resources by deleting the old resource before creating the new one.
For what it’s worth, I managed to make Pulumi show me this kind-of-strange diff:
pulumi preview
Previewing update (dev):
Type Name Plan Info
pulumi:pulumi:Stack pulumi-alias-replace-test-dev
+- ├─ random:index:RandomPassword something_else replace [diff: ~length]
+- └─ random:index:RandomPassword pw replace
Resources:
+-1 to replace
1 unchanged
Here I’ve renamed the resource pw
to something_else
, added an alias, and at the same time changed the length
of the RandomPassword which requires a replace
operation.
Does this ring a bell with anyone and/or is it worth a GitHub issue even though I haven’t been able to reproduce it (yet)?billowy-laptop-45963
05/11/2021, 6:58 PMpulumi nuke
which is a more forceful destroy? There are a lot of resources to delete by hand....gorgeous-minister-41131
05/11/2021, 7:47 PMdef get_kv2_secret(self, mount_point: str, path: str) -> pulumi.Output:
"""
Retrieve a KV2 secret based on the given path.
This method actually returns a Pulumi Output future representing a
secret so that the actual value is obscured until apply time.
"""
output_secret = pulumi.Output.secret(
self.hvac_client.secrets.kv.v2.read_secret_version(
mount_point=mount_point, path=path
)
)
return output_secret
But it would be nice to know what pulumi's roadmap is for supporting placeholder config values which are just references to the "real" K/V path in vault (similar to above^).elegant-pager-5412
05/12/2021, 2:44 PMpulumi up
. It prints the View Live: URL
but then it hangs. Any idea why?elegant-pager-5412
05/12/2021, 2:48 PMfast-whale-9064
05/12/2021, 2:58 PMbitter-island-28909
05/12/2021, 3:46 PMdefaultTags
property on an aws.Provider
, like so:
new aws.Provider(`my-provider`, {
...
defaultTags: {
"foo": "bar"
}
});
I’m getting a type error on defaultTags
, stating that Object literal may only specify known properties, and '"foo"' does not exist in type 'Input<ProviderDefaultTags>'.
A type option for Input<T>
is T
, and the signature of ProviderDefaultTags
is {[key: string]: string}
So using an arbitrary string such as “foo”:“bar” should work.
What am I missing?bitter-island-28909
05/12/2021, 3:46 PMdefaultTags
property on an aws.Provider
, like so:
new aws.Provider(`my-provider`, {
...
defaultTags: {
"foo": "bar"
}
});
I’m getting a type error on defaultTags
, stating that Object literal may only specify known properties, and '"foo"' does not exist in type 'Input<ProviderDefaultTags>'.
A type option for Input<T>
is T
, and the signature of ProviderDefaultTags
is {[key: string]: string}
So using an arbitrary string such as “foo”:“bar” should work.
What am I missing?rich-farmer-40546
05/12/2021, 3:46 PMbored-oyster-3147
05/12/2021, 3:47 PMbitter-island-28909
05/12/2021, 3:49 PMnew aws.Provider(`my-provider`, {
...
defaultTags: {
foo: "bar"
}
});
No, that’s not it: this returns a similar error: Object literal may only specify known properties, and 'foo' does not exist in type 'Input<ProviderDefaultTags>'.
rich-farmer-40546
05/12/2021, 3:54 PMbored-oyster-3147
05/12/2021, 3:55 PMdefaultTags: {
tags: {
foo: "bar"
},
}
bitter-island-28909
05/12/2021, 4:01 PM