We no longer support Node 6.X (it went end of life at the end of
April, we stopped testing on it, and now we use features that are not
in Node 6 like `Object.values`.
Note that we support 8+, and add an `engines` section to our
package.json so folks who try to install on older versions of node see
warnings.
This commit will expose the new `Invoke` routine that lists resource
outputs through the Node.js SDK.
This API is implemented via a new API, `EnumerablePromise`, which is a
collection of simple query primitives built onto the `Promise` API. The
query model is lazy and LINQ-like, and generally intended to make
`Promise` simpler to deal with in query scenarios. See #2601 for more
details.
Fixes#2600.
Running `pulumi query` over state resources will require the ability to
filter resources by type.
This commit begins the process of making this possible simply, using the
TypeScript user-defined type guards feature. This commit changes the
`CustomResource` constructor to record the `t` argument in the
`__pulumiType` field, which acts as a "sentinel" value in the resource
base, which deriving classes need only check to ensure they are of that
type. For example:
aws.s3.Bucket.isInstance(someOb)
would check the `aws.s3.Bucket.__pulumiType` field, and make sure that
the type field lines up.
Adds a new resource option `aliases` which can be used to rename a resource. When making a breaking change to the name or type of a resource or component, the old name can be added to the list of `aliases` for a resource to ensure that existing resources will be migrated to the new name instead of being deleted and replaced with the new named resource.
There are two key places this change is implemented.
The first is the step generator in the engine. When computing whether there is an old version of a registered resource, we now take into account the aliases specified on the registered resource. That is, we first look up the resource by its new URN in the old state, and then by any aliases provided (in order). This can allow the resource to be matched as a (potential) update to an existing resource with a different URN.
The second is the core `Resource` constructor in the JavaScript (and soon Python) SDKs. This change ensures that when a parent resource is aliased, that all children implicitly inherit corresponding aliases. It is similar to how many other resource options are "inherited" implicitly from the parent.
Four specific scenarios are explicitly tested as part of this PR:
1. Renaming a resource
2. Adopting a resource into a component (as the owner of both component and consumption codebases)
3. Renaming a component instance (as the owner of the consumption codebase without changes to the component)
4. Changing the type of a component (as the owner of the component codebase without changes to the consumption codebase)
4. Combining (1) and (3) to make both changes to a resource at the same time
This commit implements read_resource functionality for Python in a
manner identical to the NodeJS implementation. If an "id" option is
passed to a resource via ResourceOptions on construction, that resource
will be read and not created.
In 3621c01f4b, we implemented
CheckConfig/DiffConfig incorrectly. We should have explicilty added
the handlers (to supress the warnings we were getting) but returned an
error saying the RPC was not implemented. Instead, we just returned
success but passed back bogus data. This was "fine" at the time
because nothing called these methods.
Now that we are actually calling them, returning incorrect values
leads to errors in grpc. To deal with this we do two things:
1. Adjust the implementations in the dynamic provider to correctly
return not implemented. This allows us to pick up the default engine
behavior going forward.
2. Add some code in CheckConfig/DiffConfig that handle the gRPC error
that is returned when calling methods on the dynamic provider and fall
back to the legacy behavior. This means updating your CLI will not
cause issues for existing resources where the SDK has not been
updated.
Because of our Proxy types, every output will return something when
you call `.isSecret` on it. However, if you call it on an output from
a version of `@pulumi/pulumi` which did not support secrets, the thing
you will get back is not undefined but rather an `Output` which wraps
undefined.
Because of this, care must be taken when reading this property and so
a small helper is introduced and used in places we care about.
All existing implementations would fail if secret values were passed
to the dyanmic provider. When the provider says it does not support
secrets, the engine will do basic secrets tracking (any outputs with
the same names as secret inputs become secrets themselves).
Since we don't support nesting secrets (as they are modeled as
Outputs), as we deserialize, we push the secretness up to top level,
where we will correctly use it to mark the output as secret.
This fixes an issue where if you created a StackReference resource,
with a mix of secret and non secret properties, you would see the
"wire form" of the secrets as values on the `outputs` map of the
StackReference resource.
In our system, we model secrets as outputs with an additional bit of
metadata that says they are secret. For Read and Register resource
calls, our RPC interface says if the client side of the interface can
handle secrets being returned (i.e. the language SDK knows how to
sniff for the special signiture and resolve the output with the
special bit set).
For Invoke, we have no such model. Instead, we return a `Promise<T>`
where T's shape has just regular property fields. There's no place
for us to tack the secretness onto, since there are no Outputs.
So, for now, don't even return secret values back across the invoke
channel. We can still take them as arguments (which is good) but we
can't even return secrets as part of invoke calls. This is not ideal,
but given the way we model these sources, there's no way around
this. Fortunately, the result of these invoke calls are not stored in
the checkpoint and since the type is not Output<T> it will be clear
that the underlying value is just present in plaintext. A user that
wants to pass the result of an invoke into a resource can turn an
existing property into a secret via `pulumi.secret`.
For a given {Read,Register}Resource call, there may be a set of
outputs that should be treated as secrets, even if the provider itself
does not think they are always sensitive. For example, when
constructing a `@pulumi/random::RandomString` it's possible that you
will be using the string as a shared secret between two
resources (e.g. the resigstration of a webhook and its handler) and so
you want the value stored in the checkpoint in a secure manner.
This change augments the RPCs such that we can communicate this from
the language host into the engine.
When serializing values, if the other end of the resource monitor
interface does not support secrets (e.g. it is an older CLI), don't
pass secrets to it.
`Output<T>` now tracks if an output represents secret data or
not. When secret, it is marshalled as a secret value and we signal to
the resource monitor that it is safe to return secret values to us.
The `pulumi` module exports a new functiion, `secret<T>` which works
in the same was a `output<T>` except that it marks the underlying
output as a secret.
This secret bit flows as you would expect across `all`'s and
`apply`'s.
Note that in process memory, the raw value is still present, when you
run an `apply` for a secret output, you are able to see the raw
value. In addition, if you capture a secret output with a lambda, the
raw value will be present in the captured source text.
- When configuring a provider, the engine can now communicate to the
provider if it supports marhsalling secrets as rich values, if so,
the provider should return any secret values as typed secret
objects.
- When configuring a provider, the provider can now communicate if it
supports accepting secrets as rich values. When true, the engine
should marshall secrets as strongly typed values when passing them
to the provider
- The resource monitor is agumented such that a client can ask if it
understands a given feature. We will use this to test support for
secrets, so the language SDKs can understand how they should
marshall secrets when calling resource monitor RPCs
- Register and Read resource gain additional flags to let the resource
monitor know if the client can understand secret values being passed
back as a the result of a call.
We changed the `pulumi update` command to be `pulumi up` a while back
(`update` is an alias of `up`). This change just makes it so we refer to
the actual command, `pulumi up`, instead of the older `pulumi update`.
In previous commits, we have changed the language plugin protocol to
allow the host to communicate that the plugin is meant to boot in "query
mode." In nodejs, this involves not doing things like registering the
default stack resource. This commit will implement this functionality.
`pulumi query` requires that language plugins know about "query mode" so
that they don't do things like try to register the default stack
resource.
To communicate that a language host should boot into query mode, we
augment the language plugin protocol to include this information.
* NodeJS: allow callers to override provider version
* Python: allow callers to override provider version
* NodeJS: add version for invoke
* Python: add version to invoke
* NodeJS: add tests for ReadResource
* Post-merge cleanup
* update doc comments
Fixes#2277.
Adds a new ignoreChanges resource option that allows specifying a list of property names whose values will be ignored during updates. The property values will be used for Create, but will be ignored for purposes of updates, and as a result also cannot trigger replacements.
This is a feature of the Pulumi engine, not of the resource providers, so no new logic is needed in providers to support this feature. Instead, the engine simply replaces the values of input properties in the goal state with old inputs for properties marked as ignoreChanges.
Currently, only top level properties may be specified in ignoreChanges. In the future, this could be extended to support paths to nested properties (including into array elements) with a JSONPath/JMESPath syntax.