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

aws_instance: TF is ignoring the new root_block_device value #5640

Closed
rafabordon opened this issue Mar 15, 2016 · 2 comments
Closed

aws_instance: TF is ignoring the new root_block_device value #5640

rafabordon opened this issue Mar 15, 2016 · 2 comments

Comments

@rafabordon
Copy link

Terraform version 0.6.12
The AMI used had 30gb by default.We wanted to enlarge the block device to 50gb.'terraform plan' didn´t notice the change.

@zhefanlin
Copy link

Having this similar problem on 0.6.13 and 0.6.14, I have created a new issue #6108
When using "root_device_block" in aws_instance resource block, to create a windows intance, AMI had 40GB by default, I set the root_block device size to 50GB,

"terraform plan" did noticed the change, but after "terraform apply", the block device /dev/sda1 on AWS console still 40GB, besides the /dev/sda1, there was another device called xvdco which is 50GB.

I log in that instance, found xvdco in windows disk manager as Disk D: 50GB, the disk C:\ was still defualt 40GB

Sometimes it works correctly, but sometimes not.

If I use "ebs_block_device" plus device_name="/dev/sda1" instead of "root_block device", it works fine everytime, root disk got attached and mount correctly, but it will recreate instance resource if I want to re-apply without destroy it.

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Apr 11, 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 11, 2020
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants