-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 21
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
fix: Separate redis security group rules #13
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Seems fine, but I don't understand why the old version would cause conflicts...
In the original, you are only using only inline rules? so it shouldn't cause a conflict? |
from_port = "6379" | ||
to_port = "6379" | ||
cidr_blocks = var.vpc_subnets_cidr_blocks | ||
security_group_id = aws_security_group.redis.id |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
make sure you run tf format
I updated the description with some info I found in the docs which lead me to this change. This appears to have fixed the confusion I was observing in the plan. I was using the |
### [1.0.4](v1.0.3...v1.0.4) (2022-02-14) ### Bug Fixes * Separate redis security group rules ([#13](#13)) ([71345d6](71345d6))
This PR is included in version 1.0.4 🎉 |
Using inline security group rules in the
aws_security_group
resource along with the standaloneaws_security_group_rule
resource causes conflicts when the terraform is applied and rules to be overwritten. This pr separates the rules out into their own resources.