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

Planned changes being hidden on large plans #195

Open
mwarkentin opened this issue Mar 22, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

Planned changes being hidden on large plans #195

mwarkentin opened this issue Mar 22, 2024 · 2 comments

Comments

@mwarkentin
Copy link
Member

Steps to Reproduce

Expected Result

I expected to see a plan showing all expected changes for all 27 slices.

Actual Result

Plan comments were rendered, but they were truncated and didn't show what would be changed.

Example:

module.instance["1"].data.google_iam_policy.os_login: Reading...
module.instance["0"].data.google_iam_policy.os_login: Reading...
module.instance["2"].data.google_iam_policy.os_login: Reading...
module.instance["2"].data.google_iam_policy.os_login: Read complete after 0s [id=1708961782]
module.instance["1"].data.google_iam_policy.os_login: Read complete after 0s [id=1708961782]
module.instance["0"].data.google_iam_policy.os_login: Read complete after 0s [id=1708961782]

Terraform used the selected providers to generate the following execution
plan. Resource actions are indicated with the following symbols:
  ~ update in-place

...
( 2.2KB, 59 lines skipped )
...
            # (11 unchanged elements hidden)
        }
        name                      = "rc-ingest-2"
        tags                      = [
            "internal",
            "rc-ingest-2",
            "redis",
            "salt",
            "use-nat",
        ]
        # (17 unchanged attributes hidden)

        # (6 unchanged blocks hidden)
    }

Plan: 0 to add, 3 to change, 0 to destroy.

─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

Saved the plan to:
tfplan

To perform exactly these actions, run the following command to apply:
    terraform apply "tfplan"

Some only contained this amount of output:

module.indexer_ratelimiter.module.instance["0"].data.google_iam_policy.os_login: Reading...
module.indexer_ratelimiter.module.instance["2"].data.google_iam_policy.os_login: Reading...
...
( 6.7KB, 162 lines skipped )
...

─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

Saved the plan to:
tfplan

To perform exactly these actions, run the following command to apply:
    terraform apply "tfplan"
@nirajdewani
Copy link

Steps to Reproduce

Expected Result

I expected to see a plan showing all expected changes in their entirety.

Actual Result

Plan comments were rendered, but they were truncated and didn't show what would be changed.

Example:

data.terraform_remote_state.iam: Reading...
data.terraform_remote_state.iam: Read complete after 0s
data.google_project.project: Reading...
data.google_compute_network_endpoint_group.symbolicator[0]: Reading...
data.google_project.project: Read complete after 0s [id=projects/sentry-st-geico]
data.google_iam_policy.gke_kms_binding: Reading...
data.google_iam_policy.gke_kms_binding: Read complete after 0s [id=2209302655]
...
( 3.3KB, 38 lines skipped )
...
        name                        = "primary"
        # (27 unchanged attributes hidden)

      ~ resource_usage_export_config {
          ~ enable_network_egress_metering       = false -> true
            # (1 unchanged attribute hidden)

            # (1 unchanged block hidden)
        }

        # (23 unchanged blocks hidden)
    }

Plan: 0 to add, 2 to change, 0 to destroy.

@Dav1dde
Copy link
Member

Dav1dde commented Jun 27, 2024

Running into the same issue when trying to change node pools for Relay, a single nodepool is already too large for the diff/comment and unfortunately it omits all the important information (e.g. the name).

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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants