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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

One-off "job" Stacks ("auto destruct") #69

Closed
eladb opened this issue Jul 11, 2018 · 3 comments
Closed

One-off "job" Stacks ("auto destruct") #69

eladb opened this issue Jul 11, 2018 · 3 comments
Labels
effort/small Minimal effort required for implementation status/stale The RFC did not get any significant enough progress or tracking and has become stale.

Comments

@eladb
Copy link
Contributor

eladb commented Jul 11, 2018

We should consider some support for "one off" stacks. This can be used for various things like running integration tests or setting up infra for a big data analysis job that requires many resources and then should automatically tear down.

I would implement this is an construct that you can add to a stack and will automatically delete it when it receives an SNS notification. Then, when the job is over, it can publish the notification and the "auto destruct" logic will issue a DeleteStack.
@eladb eladb self-assigned this Sep 8, 2019
@eladb
Copy link
Contributor Author

eladb commented Oct 2, 2019

Still relevant

@eladb eladb transferred this issue from aws/aws-cdk Jan 23, 2020
@eladb eladb removed their assignment Jan 23, 2020
@eladb eladb added the effort/small Minimal effort required for implementation label Jan 23, 2020
@eladb eladb changed the title Idea: one off "job" stacks ("auto destruct") One-off "job" Stacks ("auto destruct") Jun 23, 2020
@eladb eladb added the status/proposed Newly proposed RFC label Jun 23, 2020
@pgollucci
Copy link

https://github.com/jmb12686/cdk-time-bomb is this

@mrgrain
Copy link
Contributor

mrgrain commented Oct 27, 2023

Solved by Ecosystem.

Marking this RFCs as stale since there has been little recent activity and it is not currently close to getting accepted as-is. We appreciate the effort that has gone into this proposal. Marking an RFCs as stale is not a one-way door. If you have made substantial changes to the proposal, please open a new issue/RFC. You might also consider raising a PR to aws/aws-cdk directly or self-publishing to Construct Hub.

@mrgrain mrgrain closed this as not planned Won't fix, can't repro, duplicate, stale Oct 27, 2023
@mrgrain mrgrain added status/stale The RFC did not get any significant enough progress or tracking and has become stale. and removed status/proposed Newly proposed RFC labels Oct 27, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
effort/small Minimal effort required for implementation status/stale The RFC did not get any significant enough progress or tracking and has become stale.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@pgollucci @mrgrain @eladb