fix(core): policy validation trace incorrect for larger constructs #26466
Conversation
Ran into an issue where the construct trace was incorrect in larger projects, specifically where there are constructs that contain multiple constructs. To get the construct trace tree we first construct a new tree that only contains the path to the terminal construct (the one with the trace). We drop all the other constructs in the tree that don't relate. For example, if we had a tree like: ``` ->App -->MyStage --->MyStack1 ---->MyConstruct ----->Resource --->MyStack2 ---->MyConstruct ----->Resource --->MyStack3 ---->MyConstruct ----->Resource ``` And we want to get a new tree for `/App/MyStage/MyStack2/MyConstruct/Resource` it should look like this: ``` ->App -->MyStage --->MyStack2 ---->MyConstruct ----->Resource ``` We weren't correctly generating the new tree correctly and would always end up with the tree being the first item in the list. I've updated one of the tests, and also tested this on a more complex application.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The pull request linter has failed. See the aws-cdk-automation comment below for failure reasons. If you believe this pull request should receive an exemption, please comment and provide a justification.
A comment requesting an exemption should contain the text Exemption Request. Additionally, if clarification is needed add Clarification Request to a comment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The pull request linter has failed. See the aws-cdk-automation comment below for failure reasons. If you believe this pull request should receive an exemption, please comment and provide a justification.
A comment requesting an exemption should contain the text Exemption Request. Additionally, if clarification is needed add Clarification Request to a comment.
corymhall
added
the
pr-linter/exempt-integ-test
aws-cdk-automation
dismissed
their stale review
✅ Updated pull request passes all PRLinter validations. Dismissing previous PRLinter review.
otaviomacedo
added
the
pr/do-not-merge
aws-cdk-automation
dismissed
their stale review
✅ Updated pull request passes all PRLinter validations. Dismissing previous PRLinter review.
|
Thank you for contributing! Your pull request will be updated from main and then merged automatically (do not update manually, and be sure to allow changes to be pushed to your fork). |
AWS CodeBuild CI Report
Powered by github-codebuild-logs, available on the AWS Serverless Application Repository |
|
Thank you for contributing! Your pull request will be updated from main and then merged automatically (do not update manually, and be sure to allow changes to be pushed to your fork). |
…ws#26466) Ran into an issue where the construct trace was incorrect in larger projects, specifically where there are constructs that contain multiple constructs. To get the construct trace tree we first construct a new tree that only contains the path to the terminal construct (the one with the trace). We drop all the other constructs in the tree that don't relate. For example, if we had a tree like: ``` ->App -->MyStage --->MyStack1 ---->MyConstruct ----->Resource --->MyStack2 ---->MyConstruct ----->Resource --->MyStack3 ---->MyConstruct ----->Resource ``` And we want to get a new tree for `/App/MyStage/MyStack2/MyConstruct/Resource` it should look like this: ``` ->App -->MyStage --->MyStack2 ---->MyConstruct ----->Resource ``` We weren't correctly generating the new tree correctly and would always end up with the tree being the first item in the list. I've updated one of the tests, and also tested this on a more complex application. ---- *By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache-2.0 license*
Ran into an issue where the construct trace was incorrect in larger projects, specifically where there are constructs that contain multiple constructs.
To get the construct trace tree we first construct a new tree that only contains the path to the terminal construct (the one with the trace). We drop all the other constructs in the tree that don't relate. For example, if we had a tree like:
And we want to get a new tree for
/App/MyStage/MyStack2/MyConstruct/Resourceit should look like this:We weren't correctly generating the new tree correctly and would always end up with the tree being the first item in the list.
I've updated one of the tests, and also tested this on a more complex application.
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache-2.0 license