Terraform should have remained stateless

Re:Terraform should have remained stateless by nathants on Saturday May 28, 2022 @01:51AM (#31537945)

using names to uniquely identify infrastructure is very convenient and how most of aws already works. why not take advantage of that instead mapping name to uuid via state? in what scenario are non-stable infrastructure names useful?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Terraform should have remained stateless by jen20 on Saturday May 28, 2022 @10:11AM (#31540473)

It certainly isn’t how “most” of AWS works. Nothing makes the name tags for important APIs like VPC or EC2 even exist, yet alone be unique. They use provider-assigned IDs instead.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Terraform should have remained stateless by nathants on Saturday May 28, 2022 @11:54AM (#31541303)

vpc and ec2 are the big ones. they both support tagging atomically during create though, so it’s fine?

for ec2 i’m not sure i’d want unique names per instance. typically i prefer groups of instances with the same name.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Terraform should have remained stateless by taeric on Saturday May 28, 2022 @09:30AM (#31540187)

If you are using cloud formation, it already does a uuid like name on resources it creates.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Terraform should have remained stateless by nathants on Saturday May 28, 2022 @11:56AM (#31541315)

i’m not. i do my own thing[1] with the go sdk.

1. https://github.com/nathants/libaws

[ Parent | on HN ]