The wording for refresh doesn't accurately convey that the operations
aren't actually mutating your resources, but instead are simply changing
your checkpoint state. This change (hopefully) helps in two ways:
First, put text just before the prompt:
Do you want to perform this refresh?
No resources will be modified as part of this refresh; just your stack's state will be.
Second, alter the summary ever-so-slightly, from:
info: 2 changes performed:
~ 2 resources updated
3 resources unchanged
to:
info: 2 changes refreshed:
~ 2 resources updated
3 resources unchanged
This reads just slightly better, and removes any sense of panic I might
have otherwise had that my refresh just did something wrong.
As I was in here, since I had to pass UpdateKind information to new
places, I cleaned up the situation where we had three mostly-similar
enums (but which actually diverged) and several areas where we were
using untyped strings for this same information. Now there's just one.
This fixespulumi/pulumi#1551.
The newly added `pulumi config refresh` updates your local copy of the
Pulumi.<stack-name>.yaml file to have the same configuration as the
most recent deployment in the cloud.
This can be used in a varirty of ways. One place we plan to use it is
in automation to clean up "leaked" stacks we have in CI. With the
changes you'll now be able to do the following:
```
$ cd $(mktemp -d)
$ echo -e "name: who-cares\nruntime: nodejs" > Pulumi.yaml
$ pulumi stack select <leaked-stack-name>
$ pulumi config refresh -f
$ pulumi destroy --force
```
Having a simpler gesture for the above is something we'll want to do
long term (we should be able to support `pulumi destory <stack-name>`
from a completely empty folder, today you need a Pulumi.yaml file
present, even if the contents don't matter).
But this gets us a little closer to where we want to be and introduces
a helpful primitive in the system.
Contributes to #814
This change captures the Git committer and author's login and email
addresses, so that we can display them prominently in the service. At
the moment, we only attribute updates to the identity that performed the
update which, in CI scenarios, is often always the same person for an
organization. This makes Pulumi look like a needlessly lonely place.
This change implements a `pulumi refresh` command. It operates a bit
like `pulumi update`, and friends, in that it supports `--preview` and
`--diff`, along with the usual flags, and will update your checkpoint.
It works through substitution of the deploy.Source abstraction, which
generates a sequence of resource registration events. This new
deploy.RefreshSource takes in a prior checkpoint and will walk it,
refreshing the state via the associated resource providers by invoking
Read for each resource encountered, and merging the resulting state with
the prior checkpoint, to yield a new resource.Goal state. This state is
then fed through the engine in the usual ways with a few minor caveats:
namely, although the engine must generate steps for the logical
operations (permitting us to get nice summaries, progress, and diffs),
it mustn't actually carry them out because the state being imported
already reflects reality (a deleted resource has *already* been deleted,
so of course the engine need not perform the deletion). The diffing
logic also needs to know how to treat the case of refresh slightly
differently, because we are going to be diffing outputs and not inputs.
Note that support for managed stacks is not yet complete, since that
requires updates to the service to support a refresh endpoint. That
will be coming soon ...
This change includes a bunch of refactorings I made in prep for
doing refresh (first, the command, see pulumi/pulumi#1081):
* The primary change is to change the way the engine's core update
functionality works with respect to deploy.Source. This is the
way we can plug in new sources of resource information during
planning (and, soon, diffing). The way I intend to model refresh
is by having a new kind of source, deploy.RefreshSource, which
will let us do virtually everything about an update/diff the same
way with refreshes, which avoid otherwise duplicative effort.
This includes changing the planOptions (nee deployOptions) to
take a new SourceFunc callback, which is responsible for creating
a source specific to the kind of plan being requested.
Preview, Update, and Destroy now are primarily differentiated by
the kind of deploy.Source that they return, rather than sprinkling
things like `if Destroying` throughout. This tidies up some logic
and, more importantly, gives us precisely the refresh hook we need.
* Originally, we used the deploy.NullSource for Destroy operations.
This simply returns nothing, which is how Destroy works. For some
reason, we were no longer doing this, and instead had some
`if Destroying` cases sprinkled throughout the deploy.EvalSource.
I think this is a vestige of some old way we did configuration, at
least judging by a comment, which is apparently no longer relevant.
* Move diff and diff-printing logic within the engine into its own
pkg/engine/diff.go file, to prepare for upcoming work.
* I keep noticing benign diffs anytime I regenerate protobufs. I
suspect this is because we're also on different versions. I changed
generate.sh to also dump the version into grpc_version.txt. At
least we can understand where the diffs are coming from, decide
whether to take them (i.e., a newer version), and ensure that as
a team we are monotonically increasing, and not going backwards.
* I also tidied up some tiny things I noticed while in there, like
comments, incorrect types, lint suppressions, and so on.
The filenames we used to store history data locally only had second
level precision. On my machine, the test history test is able to run
multiple `pulumi update` commands in the same second, which causes a
newer history file to overwrite an older one.
This change moves to using a nanosecond precision timestamp when
writing config. In addition, the CLI was trying to sort the updates
that came back from the backend (instead of just trusting them to be
in newest first order, as we documented) so I removed that code as
well.
This PR adds a new `pulumi history` command, which prints the update history for a stack.
The local backend stores the update history in a JSON file on disk, next to the checkpoint file. The cloud backend simply provides the update metadata, and expects to receive all the data from a (NYI) `/history` REST endpoint.
`pkg/backend/updates.go` defines the data that is being persisted. The way the data is wired through the system is adding a new `backend.UpdateMetadata` parameter to a Stack/Backend's `Update` and `Destroy` methods.
I use `tests/integration/stack_outputs/` as the simple app for the related tests, hence the addition to the `.gitignore` and fixing the name in the `Pulumi.yaml`.
Fixes#636.
