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

azurerm_postgresql_flexible_server: more support for in-place major version upgrade #28559

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

wuxu92
Copy link
Contributor

@wuxu92 wuxu92 commented Jan 21, 2025

Community Note

  • Please vote on this PR by adding a 👍 reaction to the original PR to help the community and maintainers prioritize for review
  • Please do not leave comments along the lines of "+1", "me too" or "any updates", they generate extra noise for PR followers and do not help prioritize for review

Description

Per API's behavior of create_mode only works when creating the instance, and upgrade the version of the server should not cause a force-recreate of the resource. I have tested locally, whether create_mode set or not, the version can be upgrade successfully. So this PR changes the force-new logic to only when downgrading the version.

PR Checklist

  • I have followed the guidelines in our Contributing Documentation.
  • I have checked to ensure there aren't other open Pull Requests for the same update/change.
  • I have checked if my changes close any open issues. If so please include appropriate closing keywords below.
  • I have updated/added Documentation as required written in a helpful and kind way to assist users that may be unfamiliar with the resource / data source.
  • I have used a meaningful PR title to help maintainers and other users understand this change and help prevent duplicate work.
    For example: “resource_name_here - description of change e.g. adding property new_property_name_here

Changes to existing Resource / Data Source

  • I have added an explanation of what my changes do and why I'd like you to include them (This may be covered by linking to an issue above, but may benefit from additional explanation).
  • I have written new tests for my resource or datasource changes & updated any relevent documentation.
  • I have successfully run tests with my changes locally. If not, please provide details on testing challenges that prevented you running the tests.
  • (For changes that include a state migration only). I have manually tested the migration path between relevant versions of the provider.

Testing

  • My submission includes Test coverage as described in the Contribution Guide and the tests pass. (if this is not possible for any reason, please include details of why you did or could not add test coverage)
--- PASS: TestAccPostgresqlFlexibleServer_upgradeVersion (2564.89s)
PASS
ok      github.com/hashicorp/terraform-provider-azurerm/internal/services/postg

Change Log

Below please provide what should go into the changelog (if anything) conforming to the Changelog Format documented here.

This is a (please select all that apply):

  • Bug Fix
  • New Feature (ie adding a service, resource, or data source)
  • Enhancement
  • Breaking Change

Related Issue(s)

Fixes #25184

Note

If this PR changes meaningfully during the course of review please update the title and description as required.

@wuxu92 wuxu92 force-pushed the pg/update-version branch from 5346a48 to 7e1a5ea Compare January 21, 2025 03:04
@github-actions github-actions bot added the bug label Jan 21, 2025
@wuxu92 wuxu92 marked this pull request as ready for review January 21, 2025 03:10
@wuxu92 wuxu92 requested a review from a team as a code owner January 21, 2025 03:10
@nachoalonsoportillo
Copy link

Here's my proposal to improve this experience...

Say the user has deployed a server using this block:

resource "azurerm_postgresql_flexible_server" "example" {
  name                          = "example-psqlflexibleserver"
  resource_group_name           = azurerm_resource_group.example.name
  location                      = azurerm_resource_group.example.location
  version                       = "13"
  public_network_access_enabled = true
  administrator_login           = "myadmin"
  administrator_password        = "mypassword"
  storage_mb                    = 32768
  sku_name                      = "B_Standard_B1ms"
  zone                          = 1
  create_mode                   = "Default"
  

My proposal is that we implement some additional allow_major_version_upgrade boolean property, which must be present and set to true for the MVU to be initiated. Although the backend doesn't expect or support any equivalent property, I think it would be good to have so that users don't shoot on their own food and accidentally initiate an irreversible major version upgrade operation:

resource "azurerm_postgresql_flexible_server" "example" {
  name                          = "example-psqlflexibleserver"
  resource_group_name           = azurerm_resource_group.example.name
  location                      = azurerm_resource_group.example.location
  version                       = "15" <<<<<<<<< Bumped up the version
  public_network_access_enabled = true
  administrator_login           = "myadmin"
  administrator_password        = "mypassword"
  storage_mb                    = 32768
  sku_name                      = "B_Standard_B1ms"
  zone                          = 1
  create_mode                   = "Default"
  allow_major_version_upgrade   = true  <<<<<<<<< If value set to version property is higher than current major version on instance, and this property isn't present and set to true, the provider would raise an error requiring its presence.
}

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

changing the azurerm_postgresql_flexible_server version from 11 to any other version forces a recreate
2 participants