https://pulumi.com logo
Powered by
#typescript
Title
# typescript
w

witty-park-12681

02/03/2022, 8:40 PM
Howdy everyone, I'm trying to determine if an issue I have is a bug within the typescript packages of Pulumi, I notice some inconstancy between 
RDS
and 
Elasticache
I posted the details here because I was unsure: https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi-aws/issues/1783 What I notice is that 
RDS
automatically unwraps the underlying value of its endpoint, while 
Elasticache
does not. So for 
Elasticache
one needs to use the 
apply
operator again in order to use the underlying value of 
cacheNodes
and get the actual endpoint. This seem like a bug to me - it seems to me that the outputs should be handled in the same way across packages 🤷‍♀️ Regardless I was able to come up with a workable solution but any comment or feedback is appreciated.
l

little-cartoon-10569

02/03/2022, 9:54 PM
No, that's normal. Note that outputs are unwrapped automatically for you when used as inputs. So while you can't get at 
redis.cacheNodes[0]
in your code (for example, you can't loop through it because the array is inside the Output), you can pass 
redis.cacheNodes[0]
as a parameter to another Pulumi constructor. In JS/TS, Pulumi has some clever way of promoting the 
[0]
to inside the output. It's magic.
In your example in the GitHub issue, I think you're comparing Instance.endpoint (type: Output<string>) with Cluster.cacheNodes (type: Output<ClusterCacheNode[]>). The important difference is that in cacheNodes, the type that the Output wraps is an array.
You have this as your problem example:
Copy code
this.RedisSetupOutput = {
      redishost : redis.cacheNodes[0].apply(a=>a.address),
      redis: redis
    }
This is needed because the code isn't somewhere that Pulumi unwraps inputs for you. If you were passing the address to a Pulumi constructor, you could do this:
Copy code
new aws.xyz.SomePulumiClass(name, {
  address: redis.cacheNodes[0].address
});
In this context, Pulumi is able to sort it all out for you.
✅ 1
w

witty-park-12681

02/03/2022, 10:18 PM
Thanks for explaining this!
4 Views
Powered by