Kinesis stream enforce deletion

[MMollyy]

Community Note

• Please vote on this issue by adding a 👍 reaction to the original issue to help the community and maintainers prioritize this request
• Please do not leave "+1" or "me too" comments, they generate extra noise for issue followers and do not help prioritize the request
• If you are interested in working on this issue or have submitted a pull request, please leave a comment

Description

to add an enforce delete property on this resource:
https://www.terraform.io/docs/providers/aws/r/kinesis_stream.html
In the event consumers are added via some other way then terraform, and you still want to manage kinesis using terraform. Knowing that it will delete all consumers as well.

New or Affected Resource(s)

aws_kinesis_stream

• aws_XXXXX

Potential Terraform Configuration

enforce_consumer_deletion - (Optional) Set property to true to enforce deletion of stream consumers. Defaults to false.

References

Terraform error message:

• aws_kinesis_stream.poc-kinesis-stream: ResourceInUseException: DeleteStream can't delete 168482979755:103-poc-kinesis-stream because there are consumers associated with this data stream. To delete 103-poc-kinesis-stream anyway, set the EnforceConsumerDeletion parameter to true to force the deletion of all the consumers that are associated with it.
  status code: 400, request id: f92ab05f-47a7-03f0-ac10-ab2cad1d8ba0

Console allows the checkbox to be marked.

[bflad]

The new enforce_consumer_deletion argument for the aws_kinesis_stream resource has been merged and will release with version 2.12.0 of the Terraform AWS Provider, later today. 👍

[bflad]

This has been released in version 2.12.0 of the Terraform AWS provider. Please see the Terraform documentation on provider versioning or reach out if you need any assistance upgrading.

[ghost]

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 feel this issue should be reopened, we encourage creating a new issue linking back to this one for added context. Thanks!