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/aws: allow empty value for autoscaling schedule parameters #9941

Closed

Conversation

glasser
Copy link
Contributor

@glasser glasser commented Nov 8, 2016

Specifically, this allows you to create a schedule which only changes
some of the group parameters without changing others, by setting the
parameters you wish to remain empty to -1. This means you can adjust
min or max size without affecting the desired capacity, for example.

The ad hoc support for -1 isn't as nice as having real support for
leaving values out (see #5694) but it solves a real use case.

Fixes #5681.

@glasser
Copy link
Contributor Author

glasser commented Dec 28, 2016

Updated to resolve merge conflicts.

Specifically, this allows you to create a schedule which only changes
some of the group parameters without changing others, by setting the
parameters you wish to remain empty to -1.  This means you can adjust
min or max size without affecting the desired capacity, for example.

The ad hoc support for -1 isn't as nice as having real support for
leaving values out (see hashicorp#5694) but it solves a real use case.

Fixes hashicorp#5681.
@glasser glasser force-pushed the glasser/scheduled-action-empty branch from 6f62c21 to 4c06b64 Compare May 12, 2017 00:59
@glasser
Copy link
Contributor Author

glasser commented May 12, 2017

Updated to resolve merge conflicts, again. Would love to see this merged!

@grubernaut grubernaut requested a review from catsby May 12, 2017 02:42
@nikhilmat
Copy link

Is there any movement on this PR? This would be immensely helpful :)

@mallyvai
Copy link

+1'ing - This would be incredibly helpful in terms of operational overhead for us since we rely heavily on ASGs. Are there any concerns from Hashicorp's side w.r.t. this PR?

@cyrilgdn
Copy link

+1

But maybe you should move this PR in the new provider: repo https://github.com/terraform-providers/terraform-provider-aws ?

@grubernaut
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @glasser, thanks for the contribution!

Extremely sorry we didn't get to this sooner, and now have more to ask of you. If you wouldn't mind migrating this PR to the new provider repository and tag me, I'll be sure to review it as soon as I can.

If you no longer wish to author this PR, I can migrate it for you as well.

Closing for now though, thanks again!

@grubernaut grubernaut closed this Jul 24, 2017
@glasser
Copy link
Contributor Author

glasser commented Jul 25, 2017

@grubernaut If you're inspired to migrate it, that would be great — I haven't had time to update our fork of Terraform (and our build system) to the new multi-repo world yet.

@grubernaut
Copy link
Contributor

Okay cool, I'll work on this tomorrow. Thanks for all the initial work on this @glasser!

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Apr 8, 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 8, 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.

aws_autoscaling_schedule defaults desired_capacity to zero with no way of specifying an empty value
6 participants