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

provider/google: detach disks before deleting them. #14651

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
May 23, 2017

Conversation

paddycarver
Copy link
Contributor

When a google_compute_disk is attached to a google_compute_instance,
deleting can be tricky. GCP doesn't allow disks that are attached to
instances to be deleted. Normally, this is fine; the instance depends on
the disk, so by the time the disk is deleted, the instance should
already be gone.

However, some reports have cropped up (#8667) that deleting disks is
failing because they're still attached to instances. Though this
shouldn't happen, it appears it can happen under some unknown
conditions.

This PR adds logic that will attempt to detach disks from any instances
they're attached to before deleting the disks, adding another safeguard
that should prevent this behaviour.

When a `google_compute_disk` is attached to a `google_compute_instance`,
deleting can be tricky. GCP doesn't allow disks that are attached to
instances to be deleted. Normally, this is fine; the instance depends on
the disk, so by the time the disk is deleted, the instance should
already be gone.

However, some reports have cropped up (#8667) that deleting disks is
failing because they're still attached to instances. Though this
shouldn't happen, it appears it can happen under some unknown
conditions.

This PR adds logic that will attempt to detach disks from any instances
they're attached to before deleting the disks, adding another safeguard
that should prevent this behaviour.
Copy link
Contributor

@catsby catsby left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM assuming tests pass

@paddycarver
Copy link
Contributor Author

Tests pass, merging. :)

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Apr 7, 2020

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 have found a problem that seems similar to this, please open a new issue and complete the issue template so we can capture all the details necessary to investigate further.

@ghost ghost locked and limited conversation to collaborators Apr 7, 2020
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.

2 participants