https://pulumi.com logo
Powered by
e

elegant-crayon-4967

06/22/2021, 9:37 PM
Curious how folks out there are handling creating an EC2 Instance and in the same stack, passing the Instance ID as a string for an SSM Parameter?
basically doing something like the following
Copy code
instance = new aws.ec2.instance(.......)

ssmParam = new aws.ssm.Parameter('ssmParam', { name: InstanceParam, value: instance.id }}
Always errors out
l

little-cartoon-10569

06/22/2021, 9:52 PM
What's the error?
Not really a typescript issue though 🙂
a

acceptable-army-69872

06/22/2021, 10:04 PM
One trick when I'm working with a new resource type is to create one by hand in a test account, with some of the settings I care about, and then import it into a stack to see the "Example" code. Helps me work thru docs that I don't find clear.
e

elegant-crayon-4967

06/22/2021, 10:06 PM
I chose the typescript because of promises
dont’ think this would be an issue with python
a

acceptable-army-69872

06/22/2021, 10:07 PM
I agree with @little-cartoon-10569, need to see the error, and probably the value of 
InstanceParam
l

little-cartoon-10569

06/22/2021, 10:07 PM
I meant, this question could go in #general 🙂
e

elegant-crayon-4967

06/22/2021, 10:07 PM
basically passing this instance Id as a string always results in 
"instanceId": "Calling [toJSON] on an [Output<T>] is not supported.\n\nTo get the value of an Output as a JSON value or JSON string consider either:\n    1: o.apply(v => v.toJSON())\n    2: o.apply(v => JSON.stringify(v))\n\nSee <https://pulumi.io/help/outputs> for more details.\nThis function may throw in a future version of @pulumi/pulumi.",
l

little-cartoon-10569

06/22/2021, 10:10 PM
That implies that 
aws.ssm.Parameter
isn't working the same as normal Pulumi resource constructors. Let me check the code.
e

elegant-crayon-4967

06/22/2021, 10:11 PM
here is the full snippet we’re using for the SSM Param:
Copy code
pulumi.all([params, sqlInstance.id]).apply(([paramsOut, sqlInstanceId]) => {
				if (element.ssmInstanceConfigParameterName) {
					new aws.ssm.Parameter(element.ssmInstanceConfigParameterName, {
						name: element.ssmInstanceConfigParameterName,
						type: 'String',
						overwrite: element.ssmInstanceConfigParameterOverwrite,
						value: JSON.stringify({
							params: paramsOut,
							instanceId: sqlInstanceId,
							outputLocation: {
								s3BucketName: 'mb-ssm-logs-ec2-sql-infra',
								s3KeyPrefix: 'ssm-logs'
							},
							documentName: associationName,
							region: process.env.NODE_CONFIG_REGION
						})
					});
				}
			});
l

little-cartoon-10569

06/22/2021, 10:13 PM
Ah, that's radically different.
b

billowy-army-68599

06/22/2021, 10:14 PM
you're passing an 
instance.id
to the 
value
field and it doesn't take an output, you'll need an 
apply
l

little-cartoon-10569

06/22/2021, 10:14 PM
In this case, the type of value is string, so you need to be careful about interpolating. And as a double-gotcha, you are instantiating a resource inside an apply(), which is usually best avoided.
The value field is 
pulumi.Input<string>
, @billowy-army-68599? At least in parameter.d.ts, it is.
e

elegant-crayon-4967

06/22/2021, 10:15 PM
yea, so the latest change I did was removing the pulumi.all
and just
Copy code
if (element.ssmInstanceConfigParameterName) {
					new aws.ssm.Parameter(element.ssmInstanceConfigParameterName, {
						name: element.ssmInstanceConfigParameterName,
						type: 'String',
						overwrite: element.ssmInstanceConfigParameterOverwrite,
						value: JSON.stringify({
							params: paramsOut,
							instanceId: sqlInstance.id,
							outputLocation: {
								s3BucketName: 'mb-ssm-logs-ec2-sql-infra',
								s3KeyPrefix: 'ssm-logs'
							},
							documentName: associationName,
							region: process.env.NODE_CONFIG_REGION
						})
					});
				}
l

little-cartoon-10569

06/22/2021, 10:15 PM
It won't work without the .all, in this format. But it would be better to move the .all to be part of the value property, rather than wrapping the constructor.
Let me have a go at refactoring, onesec.
b

billowy-army-68599

06/22/2021, 10:16 PM
oh interesring, it was a string last time I used it. Ignore me
l

little-cartoon-10569

06/22/2021, 10:20 PM
(Untested!)
e

elegant-crayon-4967

06/22/2021, 10:22 PM
lol, well I just ran it and it looks to work!
l

little-cartoon-10569

06/22/2021, 10:22 PM
Awesome!
If you have any 
apply()
code containing a resource constructor, refactor it like this. The dependencies work much better, and so does pulumi preview.
e

elegant-crayon-4967

06/22/2021, 10:23 PM
you are amazing! Next step is testing it now with a net new box, since my last try the instance created but ssm failed, so pulumi knew about the ID this time around, next run it shouldn’t and will be the true test
yes, absolutely
you rock
l

little-cartoon-10569

06/22/2021, 10:24 PM
Aww shucks
g

gorgeous-country-43026

06/23/2021, 9:00 AM
The concept of 
Input
and 
Output
is possible the hardest in Pulumi to grasp completely but it does make sense and once you get it it is really nice way to handle the problem. It also enables resource wait functionality via dependency tracking which is just pure awesomeness
Powered by