Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

azurerm_application_gateway: add connection draining #2778

Merged
merged 7 commits into from
Feb 28, 2019
Merged

azurerm_application_gateway: add connection draining #2778

merged 7 commits into from
Feb 28, 2019

Conversation

SteveByerly
Copy link
Contributor

Add Connection Draining to the Application Gateway backend_http_settings.

Addresses topics referenced in #1519 and #1576

Please note:
I am not very familiar with Go. I was also unable to properly run the tests. Any and all feedback/help is appreciated.

@ghost ghost added the size/L label Jan 27, 2019
@SteveByerly
Copy link
Contributor Author

@tombuildsstuff i see Travis passed, but did it actually run all the tests? Seems like the output has been consistent since the beginning of the repo

Copy link
Collaborator

@katbyte katbyte left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hi @SteveByerly,

Thank you for the PR, i've taken a look and left some comments inline. In addition could we get the documentation updated with the new properties?

And wrt the tests, travis only runs local tests and some linting, acceptance tests are all done separate on our CI server as they spin up real resources that cost money. We usually run these ourselves before merging

azurerm/resource_arm_application_gateway.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
azurerm/resource_arm_application_gateway.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@katbyte katbyte added this to the 1.22.0 milestone Jan 27, 2019
@SteveByerly SteveByerly changed the title add connection draining to application gateway http settings azurerm_application_gateway: add connection draining Jan 27, 2019
Copy link
Contributor

@tombuildsstuff tombuildsstuff left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

hey @SteveByerly

Thanks for this PR :)

I've taken a look through and left a couple of comments in addition to @katbyte's - but this is looking good. If we can fix those up we should be able to run the test suite and get this merged 👍

Thanks!

azurerm/resource_arm_application_gateway_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
azurerm/resource_arm_application_gateway.go Show resolved Hide resolved
@tombuildsstuff tombuildsstuff modified the milestones: 1.22.0, 2.0.0 Jan 29, 2019
@tombuildsstuff tombuildsstuff modified the milestones: 2.0.0, 1.23.0 Feb 7, 2019
@katbyte katbyte self-assigned this Feb 15, 2019
@ghost ghost added the documentation label Feb 15, 2019
Copy link
Collaborator

@katbyte katbyte left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hi @SteveByerly,

I hope you don't mind but to get this merged I pushed the requested changes to your branch 🙂 Once the test pass this is now good to merge!

Copy link
Contributor

@tombuildsstuff tombuildsstuff left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

otherwise LGTM 👍

azurerm/resource_arm_application_gateway_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
azurerm/resource_arm_application_gateway_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
website/docs/r/application_gateway.html.markdown Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@katbyte
Copy link
Collaborator

katbyte commented Feb 21, 2019

Hi @SteveByerly,

While running the tests i am getting the following failure on all the gateway tests:


------- Stdout: -------
=== RUN   TestAccAzureRMApplicationGateway_webApplicationFirewall
=== PAUSE TestAccAzureRMApplicationGateway_webApplicationFirewall
=== CONT  TestAccAzureRMApplicationGateway_webApplicationFirewall
--- FAIL: TestAccAzureRMApplicationGateway_webApplicationFirewall (1290.68s)
    testing.go:538: Step 0 error: After applying this step, the plan was not empty:
        
        DIFF:
        
        UPDATE: azurerm_application_gateway.test
          backend_http_settings.0.protocol: "" => "Http"

Once those failures are fixed we can get this merged 🙂

Copy link
Contributor

@tombuildsstuff tombuildsstuff left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

hey @SteveByerly

I hope you don't mind that I've pushed a commit to fix the broken test that @katbyte raised, but this now otherwise LGTM 👍

Thanks!

@tombuildsstuff
Copy link
Contributor

Tests pass:

screenshot 2019-02-28 at 11 16 27

@tombuildsstuff tombuildsstuff merged commit 1ba9b3e into hashicorp:master Feb 28, 2019
tombuildsstuff added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 28, 2019
@SteveByerly
Copy link
Contributor Author

@katbyte @tombuildsstuff thanks for all the help!

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Mar 8, 2019

This has been released in version 1.23.0 of the provider. Please see the Terraform documentation on provider versioning or reach out if you need any assistance upgrading. As an example:

provider "azurerm" {
	version = "~> 1.23.0"
}
# ... other configuration ...

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Mar 30, 2019

I'm going to lock this issue because it has been closed for 30 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active issues.

If you feel this issue should be reopened, we encourage creating a new issue linking back to this one for added context. If you feel I made an error 🤖 🙉 , please reach out to my human friends 👉 hashibot-feedback@hashicorp.com. Thanks!

@ghost ghost locked and limited conversation to collaborators Mar 30, 2019
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants