Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
feat: Database resource v1 readiness #2834
feat: Database resource v1 readiness #2834
Changes from 6 commits
b6b0fb0
19958a7
1303dc6
f1cc3f3
92be484
27b42e6
c52566d
f0823fc
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
just checking: this is the new recommended Snowflake way of identifying accounts, right?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, but I changed to the documentation one
<provider_account>.<share_name>
, because we should be able to handle both identifiers. I'll modify one integration and acceptance test to show it's working.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
On second thought, we can easily support both formats on SDK level, but it's hard to support both ways in Terraform because in Read we have to assume one format. For now, I'll revert the acceptance test, because it's failing for account locator and maybe we should enforce the new format instead of supporting the old one(?). That's why originally I stayed with this description, I can revert the change to
"<organization_name>"."<account_name>"."<database_name>"
.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think that it would be best to stick with the SF recommended way. This is a change against the old behavior but it is a new resource after all. However, we should mention this change in the migration notes.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Then I'll revert the format (in the next pr) and add a note in migration guide on expected external identifiers
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
nit-pick: let's not make it the first method in this file (look where secondary is located)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Moved it under secondary.