feat(rds): new `DatabaseInstance.fromLookup` #33258

pcheungamz · 2025-01-31T14:27:59Z

Issue # (if applicable)

This replaces my previous PR #32901. I addressed the PR comments in this new PR.

This depends on this PR: cdklabs/cloud-assembly-schema#124.

Also depends on this CDK CLI PR: aws/aws-cdk-cli#138. That PR should be merged first and the CLI released, before this PR can be merged.

Reason for this change

Add DatabaseInstance.fromLookup() feature

Description of changes

Add CC API Context Provider. Needs this PR: feat: Add CC API based Context Query. cdklabs/cloud-assembly-schema#124
DatabaseInstance.fromLookup call CC API to get the database instance info from instanceIdentifier.
Add units tests.

Describe any new or updated permissions being added

User will need to have permission to run CloudControl API.

Description of how you validated changes

Tested with this code. I already have an RDS DB in my AWS account. I want to look it up and grant connect to a new user.
Saved to packages/@aws-cdk-testing/framework-integ/test/aws-rds/test/my-test-app.ts

import * as cdk from 'aws-cdk-lib';
import * as iam from 'aws-cdk-lib/aws-iam';
import * as rds from 'aws-cdk-lib/aws-rds';

const awsAccountId = 'XXXXXXXXXX79';
const instanceId = 'XXXXXXXXXX-instance-1';

const appWithDb = new cdk.App();
const stack = new cdk.Stack(appWithDb, 'StackWithVpc', {
  env: {
    region: 'us-east-1',
    account: awsAccountId,
  },
});

const dbFromLookup = rds.DatabaseInstance.fromLookup(stack, 'dbFromLookup', {
  instanceIdentifier: instanceId,
});

/* eslint-disable no-console */
console.log('lookup values', dbFromLookup.dbInstanceEndpointAddress, dbFromLookup.dbInstanceEndpointPort);

const consoleReadOnlyRole = new iam.Role(stack, 'TestRole', {
  assumedBy: new iam.ArnPrincipal('arn_for_trusted_principal'),
});
dbFromLookup.grantConnect(consoleReadOnlyRole, 'dbTestUser');

Ran this command:

../../aws-cdk/bin/cdk -a 'npx ts-node test/aws-rds/test/my-test-app.ts' synth

Checklist

[ X ] My code adheres to the CONTRIBUTING GUIDE and DESIGN GUIDELINES

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache-2.0 license

aws-cdk-automation

(This review is outdated)

aws-cdk-automation · 2025-02-06T00:13:46Z

This PR cannot be merged because it has conflicts. Please resolve them. The PR will be considered stale and closed if it remains in an unmergeable state.

aws-cdk-automation · 2025-02-10T00:13:19Z

This PR cannot be merged because it has conflicts. Please resolve them. The PR will be considered stale and closed if it remains in an unmergeable state.

rix0rrr · 2025-02-10T10:41:07Z

packages/aws-cdk-lib/aws-rds/lib/instance.ts

+      const securityGroups: ec2.ISecurityGroup[] = [];
+      const dbsg: [string] = instance.DBSecurityGroups;
+      dbsg.forEach(securityGroupId => {


💅 Instead of using forEach for a list.push() side effect, it's nicer to use a list.map() to produce another list.

const securityGroups = instance.DBSecurityGroups.map(id => ec2.SecurityGroup.fromSecurityGroupid(...))

thanks. will do

rix0rrr · 2025-02-10T10:45:16Z

packages/aws-cdk-lib/aws-rds/test/instance.from-lookup.test.ts

+    Object.assign(dataObj, { ['DBInstanceArn']: 'arn:aws:rds:us-east-1:123456789012:db:instance-1' });
+    Object.assign(dataObj, { ['Endpoint.Address']: 'instance-1.testserver.us-east-1.rds.amazonaws.com' });
+    Object.assign(dataObj, { ['Endpoint.Port']: '5432' });
+    Object.assign(dataObj, { ['DbiResourceId']: 'db-ABCDEFGHI' });
+    Object.assign(dataObj, { ['DBSecurityGroups']: [] });
+    Object.assign(dataObj, { ['Identifier']: 'instance-1' });


💅 Object.assign() is a way to copy fields from object A to object B, usually useful if you don't know what fields an object might have. Since all values are constants known in advance here, we could also have done:

const dataObj = { 'DBInstanceArn': 'arn:aws...', 'Endpoint.Address': 'instance-1.testserver', 'Endpoint.Port': '5432', // ... };

Which is a lot simpler.

I ran into a linter error. I guess it is better to turn off linter for this test files than to use Object.assign.

rix0rrr · 2025-02-10T10:46:14Z

packages/aws-cdk-lib/aws-rds/test/instance.from-lookup.test.ts

+describe('DatabaseInstanceBase from lookup with DBSG', () => {
+  test('return correct instance info', () => {
+    const dataObj = {};
+    Object.assign(dataObj, { ['DBInstanceArn']: 'arn:aws:rds:us-east-1:123456789012:db:instance-1' });


💅 Same comment here.

rix0rrr · 2025-02-10T10:48:05Z

packages/aws-cdk-lib/aws-rds/test/instance.from-lookup.test.ts

+function mockDbInstanceContextProviderWith(response: Object, paramValidator?: (options: cxschema.CcApiContextQuery) => void) {
+  const previous = ContextProvider.getValue;
+  ContextProvider.getValue = (_scope: Construct, options: GetContextValueOptions) => {
+    // do some basic sanity checks
+    expect(options.provider).toEqual(cxschema.ContextProvider.CC_API_PROVIDER);
+
+    if (paramValidator) {
+      paramValidator(options.props as any);
+    }
+
+    return {
+      value: {
+        ...response,
+      } as Map<string, Map<string, any>>,
+    };
+  };
+  return previous;
+}
+
+function restoreContextProvider(previous: (scope: any, options: GetContextValueOptions) => GetContextValueResult): void {
+  ContextProvider.getValue = previous;
+}


Did you copy this from elsewhere? Because using a Jest mock is simpler than this and it's the currently recommended way to write this.

// GIVEN const mock = jest.spyOn(ContextProvider.prototype, 'getValue').mockResolvedValue(...); // WHEN // ... // THEN expect(mock).toHaveBeenCalledWith(...); mock.restore();

yes, I borrowed it from aws-kms/test/key.from-lookup.test.ts. Will change that to follow the recommended standard.

I couldn't get jest.spyOn to work with ContextProvider. I got:

Property `getValue` does not exist in the provided object

NVM, this is a static method, so I have to use

const mock = jest.spyOn(ContextProvider, 'getValue').mockReturnValue(value);

rix0rrr · 2025-02-10T10:53:28Z

packages/aws-cdk/lib/context-providers/cc-api-provider.ts

+      const result = await cc.listResources({
+        TypeName: args.typeName,
+      });


Slightly annoying but I believe that cc.getResource and cc.listResources will return different properties (at the discretion of the resource handler implementation). getResource will definitely return everything, and listResources wil return some summarized version.

That will probably be an annoying an unexpected behavior for users in the future. The safer behavior would be to call listResources first, and then call getResource for every resource returned that way. I'm debating whether we cast that behavior in stone right now, or wait for problems to turn up...

At least this behavior should be documented somewhere.

I tested with

aws cloudcontrol list-resources --type-name AWS::RDS::DBInstance

and

aws cloudcontrol get-resource --type-name AWS::RDS::DBInstance --identifier shine-reporting-aurora-instance-1

The properties return are the same. getResource and listResources are consistent at least for DBInstance.

packages/aws-cdk/lib/context-providers/cc-api-provider.ts

rix0rrr · 2025-02-10T10:56:52Z

packages/aws-cdk/lib/context-providers/cc-api-provider.ts

+        const propsObj = getResultObj(propsObject, args.propertiesToReturn);
+
+        // Add the identifier back to the propsObj.
+        propsObj.Identifier = result.ResourceDescription?.Identifier;


Can we make returning Identifier part of getResultObj as well? Then that function is entirely responsible for producing the returned object, which seems nice and comprehensible, and we don't have to remember to do this in both query functions.

make sense. will do

rix0rrr · 2025-02-10T10:58:55Z

packages/aws-cdk/lib/context-providers/cc-api-provider.ts

+          let misMatch = false;
+          matchKey.forEach((key) => {
+            const value = findJsonValue(propsObject, key);
+            if (value !== args.propertyMatch![key]) {
+              misMatch = true;
+            }
+          });


This could be formulated as:

const filters = Object.values(args.propertyMatch); const isMatch = filters.every(([key, expected] => { const actual = findJsonValue(propsObject, key); return propertyMatchesFilter(actual, expected); }); function propertyMatchesFilter(actual: any, expected: any) { // For now we just check for strict equality, but we can implement pattern matching and fuzzy matching here later return expected === actual; }

I did 3 things here:

Use Object.values() instead of Object.keys(), so we iterate over key/value pairs (saves a lookup and some visual noise, imo).

Use list.every() instead of a forEach combined with mutating a boolean

Extract the actual comparison to a helper function, so that we have a clear location to start implementing more advanced filtering later

Thanks. will use this pattern.

I couldn't get your code to work. Object.values() doesn't give me back the key, but Object.entries() gave me both key and value. I also had trouble with every. It only gave me the first element.

This is my playground code: https://www.typescriptlang.org/play/?#code/MYewdgzgLgBAtgTwEoFNQCcAmAuGqOYA806AlmAOYA0MArmANZggDuYAfDALwwDeAUDBgByAMpQQ6AIYUUAUTDB0CAA5QUmYbmFR0tFMKqCRCzCpDkoAOgAKkqFpEBWACwBmAEyH+AXwDc-PygkLAAZqQANuroENwwAPIARgBWaNYAblIR+hAAFIj4kpgAlAH8APTlMOFRKDFWKOl1CLm5KAAeKmkaNOSYHcXcnAKVQmPBECARKFYRIBS5fR00HV3A6iUBoz6lgUmp6w1guqQoeQVoRcVWoZJyUsAAFq0A2gwoCDSZ2SgAuoNcYbGCZTGZzBYAAwA0h9cAASXjvBA+GgANSy+nhvG++h8EN2OwCQA

I got this to work

const filters = Object.entries(myRecord); filters.every((expected, index, arr) => { const key = arr[index][0]; const expected = arr[index][1]; const actual = findJsonValue(propsObject, key); return propertyMatchesFilter(actual, expected); });

Playground code: https://www.typescriptlang.org/play/?#code/MYewdgzgLgBAtgTwEoFNQCcAmAuGqOYA806AlmAOYA0MArmANZggDuYAfDALwwDeAUDBgByAMpQQ6AIYUUAUTDB0CAA5QUmYbmFR0tFMKqCRCzCpDkoAOgAKkqFpEBWACwBmAEyH+AXwDc-PwA9EEwoJCwAGakADbq6BDcMADyAEYAVmjWAG5SMfoQABSI+JKYAJQB4dAw0XEoCUlpmcDWKGC6pChFJWhllYF18RBWKNkNCIWFKAAeKlkaNOSYszRS6NII5dycAkJC1SAxKFYxIBSFy6sws-OtizDrmwDaVzMAus8ADO9rG1IIV5gFYfZ4ARneA32MHQKCgtHQYBgun0AR8A2CoWaWVGHTI3WKyD6WHKVkikjkUmAAAsps8GCgEDRcvkUJCdnxMftDsdTudCgADADSjNwABJeAyED4aAA1PL6cW8Fn6HwCgYhGDogJAA

rix0rrr · 2025-02-10T11:05:29Z

packages/aws-cdk/lib/context-providers/cc-api-provider.ts

+
+        // Add the identifier back to the propsObj.
+        propsObj.Identifier = result.ResourceDescription?.Identifier;
+        resultObj[CcApiContextProviderPlugin.RESULTS] = [propsObj];


I see you decided to return a object with a { results: [...] } key, rather than a list directly.

I'm not against it because it's more easily extensible, but I'm not sure I see the need yet and I'm curious if there are any specific reasons to do it this wat? Just returning a direct list seems simpler to me, but I wonder if you're predicting some future change I'm not seeing yet.

I was following the Coral results within the return object that I am used to seeing. I am not tied to it. Happy to change it to a direct list, since this is more idiomatic for CDK.

rix0rrr · 2025-02-10T11:06:47Z

packages/aws-cdk/test/context-providers/cc-api-provider.test.ts

+  // THEN
+  const results = result[CcApiContextProviderPlugin.RESULTS];
+  let propsObj = results[0];
+  expect(propsObj.DBInstanceArn).toEqual('arn:aws:rds:us-east-1:123456789012:db:test-instance-1');


💅 Could also do:

expect(propsObj).toEqual({ DBInstanceArn: 'arn:...', StorageEncrypted: 'true', // ... });

Or even

expect(propsObj).toEqual(expect.objectContaining({ DBInstanceArn: 'arn:...', StorageEncrypted: 'true', // ... }));

thanks. will use this pattern.

rix0rrr · 2025-02-10T11:13:56Z

packages/aws-cdk/lib/context-providers/cc-api-provider.ts

+        propsObj.Identifier = result.ResourceDescription?.Identifier;
+        resultObj[CcApiContextProviderPlugin.RESULTS] = [propsObj];
+      } else {
+        throw new TypeError(`Could not get resource ${args.exactIdentifier}.`);


Please add in the error message here.

And I don't agree that this is a TypeError.

Will use ContextProviderError instead.

rix0rrr · 2025-02-10T11:14:13Z

packages/aws-cdk/lib/context-providers/cc-api-provider.ts

+        throw new TypeError(`Could not get resource ${args.exactIdentifier}.`);
+      }
+    } catch (err) {
+      throw new TypeError(`Encountered CC API error while getting resource ${args.exactIdentifier}.`);


Please add in the error message here.

And I don't agree that this is a TypeError.

will use ContextProviderError and include err in the message.

…hat as annotations.

aws-cdk-automation · 2025-02-16T00:13:08Z

This PR cannot be merged because it has conflicts. Please resolve them. The PR will be considered stale and closed if it remains in an unmergeable state.

aws-cdk-automation · 2025-02-19T00:12:08Z

This PR cannot be merged because it has conflicts. Please resolve them. The PR will be considered stale and closed if it remains in an unmergeable state.

aws-cdk-automation · 2025-02-24T00:11:40Z

This PR cannot be merged because it has conflicts. Please resolve them. The PR will be considered stale and closed if it remains in an unmergeable state.

rix0rrr

One more thing!

rix0rrr · 2025-02-25T12:59:44Z

packages/aws-cdk-lib/aws-rds/lib/instance.ts

+          `LSG-${securityGroupId}`,
+          securityGroupId,
+        );
+      }) as unknown as ec2.ISecurityGroup[];


This cast shouldn't be necessary. Because of the { ... } you added, securityGroups will always turn out to be an array of voids [void, void, void]. The forms for an anonymous function in JavaScript are:

// Form 1: pure expression const fn1 = (...args) => expr; // Form 2: statements const fn2 = (...args) => { // potentially more statements return expr; };

You did:

const fn3 = (...args) => { // Missing 'return' expr; }

Which is a function that evaluates <expr>, drops the result on the floor, then returns void.

This tells me there's no test for it 🥸

Without the cast, I got this error:

Type 'void[]' is not assignable to type 'ISecurityGroup[]'. Type 'void' is not assignable to type 'ISecurityGroup'.ts(2322)

NVM, I understand your comment now. New Code:

if (dbsg) { securityGroups = dbsg.map(securityGroupId => { return ec2.SecurityGroup.fromSecurityGroupId( scope, `LSG-${securityGroupId}`, securityGroupId, ); }); }

I have a test for that here: https://github.com/pcheungamz/aws-cdk/blob/rds-cc-api-2/packages/aws-cdk-lib/aws-rds/test/instance.from-lookup.test.ts#L94.

expect(instance.connections.securityGroups.length).toEqual(2);

ah ok. I get it now. Will do a new commit to check securityGroupId for each of the two security groups.

rix0rrr · 2025-02-25T13:06:01Z

packages/aws-cdk/lib/context-providers/cc-api-provider.ts

+        Identifier: exactIdentifier,
+      });
+      const id = result.ResourceDescription?.Identifier ?? '';
+      if (id !== '') {


💅 I generally prefer early returns, it makes code easier to read because the straight-down code path is the expected code path.

// ❌ Don't if (goodCondition) { doThing(); } else { throw new Error('oh no'); }

// ✅ Do if (badCondition) { throw new Error('oh no'); } doThing();

(Style, not a hard blocker, I'll leave this to you to decide what to do with)

A generic Context Provider for CloudControl API. Extracted from aws/aws-cdk#33258.

… provider for CloudControl API (#138) A generic Context Provider for CloudControl API. See aws/aws-cdk#33258 for an example how to implement a `fromLookup()` method using the new context provider. (Extracted from aws/aws-cdk#33258) --- By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache-2.0 license --------- Signed-off-by: github-actions <github-actions@github.com> Co-authored-by: github-actions <github-actions@github.com> Co-authored-by: Momo Kornher <kornherm@amazon.co.uk>

rix0rrr

Approved, but it shouldn't be merged before the matching CLI PR has been released.

mrgrain · 2025-02-27T10:48:30Z

Approved, but it shouldn't be merged before the matching CLI PR has been released.

The matching CLI PR has been released! 🎉
https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk-cli/releases/tag/aws-cdk%40v2.1001.0

✅ Updated pull request passes all PRLinter validations. Dismissing previous PRLinter review.

Pull request has been modified.

codecov · 2025-03-07T16:55:48Z

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 82.24%. Comparing base (3ed7c4d) to head (b1bb804).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main   #33258   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   82.24%   82.24%           
=======================================
  Files         119      119           
  Lines        6875     6875           
  Branches     1161     1161           
=======================================
  Hits         5654     5654           
  Misses       1118     1118           
  Partials      103      103

Flag	Coverage Δ
suite.unit	`82.24% <ø> (ø)`

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Components	Coverage Δ
packages/aws-cdk	`∅ <ø> (∅)`
packages/aws-cdk-lib/core	`82.24% <ø> (ø)`

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

aws-cdk-automation · 2025-03-07T17:16:11Z

AWS CodeBuild CI Report

CodeBuild project: AutoBuildv2Project1C6BFA3F-wQm2hXv2jqQv
Commit ID: b1bb804
Result: FAILED
Build Logs (available for 30 days)

Powered by github-codebuild-logs, available on the AWS Serverless Application Repository

[feat] Add aws-rds.DatabaseInstance.fromLookup

e6b5d85

pcheungamz requested a review from a team as a code owner January 31, 2025 14:28

github-actions bot added the beginning-contributor label Jan 31, 2025

aws-cdk-automation requested a review from a team January 31, 2025 14:28

github-actions bot added effort/small feature-request p2 labels Jan 31, 2025

pcheungamz had a problem deploying to test-pipeline January 31, 2025 14:28 — with GitHub Actions Failure

aws-cdk-automation previously requested changes Jan 31, 2025

View reviewed changes

pcheungamz changed the title ~~[feat] Add aws-rds.DatabaseInstance.fromLookup~~ feat(rds) Add aws-rds.DatabaseInstance.fromLookup Jan 31, 2025

pcheungamz changed the title ~~feat(rds) Add aws-rds.DatabaseInstance.fromLookup~~ feat Add aws-rds.DatabaseInstance.fromLookup Jan 31, 2025

Merge branch 'main' into rds-cc-api-2

8fe2741

pcheungamz had a problem deploying to test-pipeline January 31, 2025 14:54 — with GitHub Actions Failure

github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Feb 1, 2025

Monthly PR metrics report #33266

Closed

rix0rrr requested changes Feb 10, 2025

View reviewed changes

rix0rrr reviewed Feb 10, 2025

View reviewed changes

getValue now returns a list of objects, simplifying the result

537bfa6

pcheungamz had a problem deploying to test-pipeline February 10, 2025 20:58 — with GitHub Actions Failure

Use expect.objectContaining to check if the result is what we expected

5ad2a0a

pcheungamz had a problem deploying to test-pipeline February 10, 2025 21:18 — with GitHub Actions Failure

Add Identifier in getResultObj

f5a1c8b

pcheungamz had a problem deploying to test-pipeline February 10, 2025 21:41 — with GitHub Actions Failure

Use mock.spyOn to mockReturnValue on ContextProvider.getValue

af1e303

pcheungamz requested a deployment to test-pipeline February 11, 2025 15:30 — with GitHub Actions Waiting

Remove try-catch from fromLookup since ContextProvider already adds t…

6e85a50

…hat as annotations.

pcheungamz requested a deployment to test-pipeline February 11, 2025 19:58 — with GitHub Actions Waiting

Add typeName and CC API to the error msg

3626088

pcheungamz requested a deployment to test-pipeline February 11, 2025 20:40 — with GitHub Actions Waiting

mrgrain changed the title ~~feat Add aws-rds.DatabaseInstance.fromLookup~~ feat(core): Add aws-rds.DatabaseInstance.fromLookup Feb 20, 2025

mrgrain changed the title ~~feat(core): Add aws-rds.DatabaseInstance.fromLookup~~ feat(rds): new DatabaseInstance.fromLookup Feb 20, 2025

mrgrain added the @aws-cdk/core label Feb 20, 2025

rix0rrr requested changes Feb 25, 2025

View reviewed changes

rix0rrr added a commit to aws/aws-cdk-cli that referenced this pull request Feb 25, 2025

feat(cli): Context Provider for CloudControl API

aa89a3a

A generic Context Provider for CloudControl API. Extracted from aws/aws-cdk#33258.

rix0rrr mentioned this pull request Feb 25, 2025

feat(cli): build your own fromLookup() imports with the new context provider for CloudControl API aws/aws-cdk-cli#138

Merged

rix0rrr and others added 2 commits February 25, 2025 14:42

Undo changes to moved packages

5db1281

Fix bug that returns security groups as a list of undefined

bb82daf

rix0rrr added the pr/do-not-merge label Feb 27, 2025

rix0rrr previously approved these changes Feb 27, 2025

View reviewed changes

kaizencc added the pr-linter/exempt-integ-test label Mar 7, 2025

Merge branch 'main' into rds-cc-api-2

b1bb804

feat(rds): new DatabaseInstance.fromLookup #33258

Are you sure you want to change the base?

feat(rds): new DatabaseInstance.fromLookup #33258

Conversation

pcheungamz commented Jan 31, 2025 • edited by rix0rrr Loading

Issue # (if applicable)

Reason for this change

Description of changes

Describe any new or updated permissions being added

Description of how you validated changes

Checklist

aws-cdk-automation left a comment • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

aws-cdk-automation commented Feb 6, 2025

aws-cdk-automation commented Feb 10, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

aws-cdk-automation commented Feb 16, 2025

aws-cdk-automation commented Feb 19, 2025

aws-cdk-automation commented Feb 24, 2025

rix0rrr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

rix0rrr Feb 25, 2025 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

rix0rrr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mrgrain commented Feb 27, 2025

codecov bot commented Mar 7, 2025 • edited Loading

Codecov Report

aws-cdk-automation commented Mar 7, 2025

AWS CodeBuild CI Report

feat(rds): new `DatabaseInstance.fromLookup` #33258

feat(rds): new `DatabaseInstance.fromLookup` #33258

pcheungamz commented Jan 31, 2025 •

edited by rix0rrr

Loading

aws-cdk-automation left a comment •

edited

Loading

rix0rrr Feb 25, 2025 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Mar 7, 2025 •

edited

Loading