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

produced an unexpected new │ value: .elasticsearch.cold.instance_configuration_version: was null, but │ now cty.NumberIntVal(0). #816

Open
anmironov opened this issue May 16, 2024 · 2 comments
Labels
bug Something isn't working

Comments

@anmironov
Copy link

we face new issue with EC Terraform provider 0.10.0, please help addressing the error below.

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

Terraform will perform the following actions:

# ec_deployment.ec_deploy will be updated in-place
~ resource "ec_deployment" "ec_deploy" {
id = "xxxxxx"
name = "ec-dev-use4-shared-mon"
tags = {
"cluster_name" = "ec-dev-use4-shared-mon"
"component" = "elastic"
"customer" = "symphony"
"environment" = "dev"
"name" = "dev"
"org" = "engineering"
"owner" = "platform-infrastructure"
"portfolio" = "core-platform"
"service" = "shared"
"stack" = "dev"
}
~ version = "7.17.16" -> "7.17.21"
# (8 unchanged attributes hidden)
}

Plan: 0 to add, 1 to change, 0 to destroy.
╷
│ Warning: Version constraints inside provider configuration blocks are deprecated
│
│ on provider.tf line 18, in provider "google":
│ 18: version = "3.69.0"
│
│ Terraform 0.13 and earlier allowed provider version constraints inside the
│ provider configuration block, but that is now deprecated and will be
│ removed in a future version of Terraform. To silence this warning, move the
│ provider version constraint into the required_providers block.
╵

Do you want to perform these actions?
Terraform will perform the actions described above.
Only 'yes' will be accepted to approve.

Enter a value: yes

ec_deployment.ec_deploy: Modifying... [id=xxxxxx]
ec_deployment.ec_deploy: Still modifying... [id=xxxxxx, 10s elapsed]
ec_deployment.ec_deploy: Still modifying... [id=xxxxxx, 20s elapsed]
ec_deployment.ec_deploy: Still modifying... [id=xxxxxx, 30s elapsed]
ec_deployment.ec_deploy: Still modifying... [id=xxxxxx, 40s elapsed]
ec_deployment.ec_deploy: Still modifying... [id=xxxxxx, 50s elapsed]
ec_deployment.ec_deploy: Still modifying... [id=xxxxxx, 1m0s elapsed]
ec_deployment.ec_deploy: Still modifying... [id=xxxxxx, 1m10s elapsed]
ec_deployment.ec_deploy: Still modifying... [id=xxxxxx, 1m20s elapsed]
ec_deployment.ec_deploy: Still modifying... [id=xxxxxx, 1m30s elapsed]
ec_deployment.ec_deploy: Still modifying... [id=xxxxxx, 1m40s elapsed]
ec_deployment.ec_deploy: Still modifying... [id=xxxxxx, 1m50s elapsed]
ec_deployment.ec_deploy: Still modifying... [id=xxxxxx, 2m0s elapsed]
ec_deployment.ec_deploy: Still modifying... [id=xxxxxx, 2m10s elapsed]
ec_deployment.ec_deploy: Still modifying... [id=xxxxxx, 2m20s elapsed]
ec_deployment.ec_deploy: Still modifying... [id=xxxxxx, 2m30s elapsed]
ec_deployment.ec_deploy: Still modifying... [id=xxxxxx, 2m40s elapsed]
ec_deployment.ec_deploy: Still modifying... [id=xxxxxx, 2m50s elapsed]
ec_deployment.ec_deploy: Still modifying... [id=xxxxxx, 3m0s elapsed]
ec_deployment.ec_deploy: Still modifying... [id=xxxxxx, 3m10s elapsed]
ec_deployment.ec_deploy: Still modifying... [id=xxxxxx, 3m20s elapsed]
ec_deployment.ec_deploy: Still modifying... [id=xxxxxx, 3m30s elapsed]
ec_deployment.ec_deploy: Still modifying... [id=xxxxxx, 3m40s elapsed]
ec_deployment.ec_deploy: Still modifying... [id=xxxxxx, 3m50s elapsed]
ec_deployment.ec_deploy: Still modifying... [id=xxxxxx, 4m0s elapsed]
╷
│ Error: Provider produced inconsistent result after apply
│
│ When applying changes to ec_deployment.ec_deploy, provider
│ "provider[\"registry.terraform.io/elastic/ec\"]" produced an unexpected new
│ value: .elasticsearch.warm.instance_configuration_version: was null, but
│ now cty.NumberIntVal(0).
│
│ This is a bug in the provider, which should be reported in the provider's
│ own issue tracker.
╵
╷
│ Error: Provider produced inconsistent result after apply
│
│ When applying changes to ec_deployment.ec_deploy, provider
│ "provider[\"registry.terraform.io/elastic/ec\"]" produced an unexpected new
│ value: .elasticsearch.cold.instance_configuration_version: was null, but
│ now cty.NumberIntVal(0).
│
│ This is a bug in the provider, which should be reported in the provider's
│ own issue tracker.
╵
╷
│ Error: Provider produced inconsistent result after apply
│
│ When applying changes to ec_deployment.ec_deploy, provider
│ "provider[\"registry.terraform.io/elastic/ec\"]" produced an unexpected new
│ value: .elasticsearch.ml.instance_configuration_version: was null, but now
│ cty.NumberIntVal(0).
│
│ This is a bug in the provider, which should be reported in the provider's
│ own issue tracker.
╵
╷
│ Error: Provider produced inconsistent result after apply
│
│ When applying changes to ec_deployment.ec_deploy, provider
│ "provider[\"registry.terraform.io/elastic/ec\"]" produced an unexpected new
│ value: .elasticsearch.hot.instance_configuration_version: was null, but now
│ cty.NumberIntVal(0).
│
│ This is a bug in the provider, which should be reported in the provider's
│ own issue tracker.
╵
╷
│ Error: Provider produced inconsistent result after apply
│
│ When applying changes to ec_deployment.ec_deploy, provider
│ "provider[\"registry.terraform.io/elastic/ec\"]" produced an unexpected new
│ value: .elasticsearch.frozen.instance_configuration_version: was null, but
│ now cty.NumberIntVal(0).
│
│ This is a bug in the provider, which should be reported in the provider's
│ own issue tracker.
╵
╷
│ Error: Provider produced inconsistent result after apply
│
│ When applying changes to ec_deployment.ec_deploy, provider
│ "provider[\"registry.terraform.io/elastic/ec\"]" produced an unexpected new
│ value: .kibana.instance_configuration_version: was null, but now
│ cty.NumberIntVal(0).
│
│ This is a bug in the provider, which should be reported in the provider's
│ own issue tracker

@anmironov anmironov added the bug Something isn't working label May 16, 2024
@SignalRichard
Copy link

Getting the same issue. This is occurring when upgrading the provider from 0.9.0 to 0.10.0 which appears to be caused by the addition of the instance_configuration_version field which previously did not exist.

@SignalRichard
Copy link

Workaround, inspecting the state after a failed apply shows that the value is set to 0; setting the instsance_configuration_version field to a value before an apply when upgrading the provider from an old deployment prevents the error from occurring.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants