Terraform-provider-azurerm: azurerm_kubernetes_cluster forces redeployment of recent cluster due to windows_profile

Created on 24 Mar 2020  ·  6Comments  ·  Source: terraform-providers/terraform-provider-azurerm

Community Note

  • Please vote on this issue by adding a 👍 reaction to the original issue to help the community and maintainers prioritize this request
  • Please do not leave "+1" or "me too" comments, they generate extra noise for issue followers and do not help prioritize the request
  • If you are interested in working on this issue or have submitted a pull request, please leave a comment

Terraform (and AzureRM Provider) Version

TF v0.12.24 - AzureRM 2.2.0

Affected Resource(s)

azure_kubernetes_cluster

Terraform Configuration Files

Any recently deployed cluster with no "windows_profile" gets provisioned fine.
On any subsequent run, TF tries to redeploy the cluster referencing a change in that block.

      - windows_profile {
          - admin_username = "azureuser" -> null # forces replacement
        }

References

breaking-change servickubernetes-cluster

Most helpful comment

A simple workaround for this issue can be made by adding this small code snippet to the resource:

 lifecycle {
    ignore_changes = [
      windows_profile,
    ]
  }

All 6 comments

A simple workaround for this issue can be made by adding this small code snippet to the resource:

 lifecycle {
    ignore_changes = [
      windows_profile,
    ]
  }

This behavior can be seen in AzureRM 2,3 as well. Its not affecting previously created resources before Azure done this change on the API. Which means that if you've provisioned the cluster a week ago you are most likely safe in the resource.

This has been released in version 2.5.0 of the provider. Please see the Terraform documentation on provider versioning or reach out if you need any assistance upgrading. As an example:

provider "azurerm" {
    version = "~> 2.5.0"
}
# ... other configuration ...

Is this going to be patched for the azurerm provider 1.44.0? My company uses that version and we are running into the same issue.

@tscully49 You will probably have to upgrade to 2.5.0

I'm going to lock this issue because it has been closed for _30 days_ ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active issues.

If you feel this issue should be reopened, we encourage creating a new issue linking back to this one for added context. If you feel I made an error 🤖 🙉 , please reach out to my human friends 👉 [email protected]. Thanks!

Was this page helpful?
0 / 5 - 0 ratings

Related issues

TPPWC picture TPPWC  ·  55Comments

shivamsriva31093 picture shivamsriva31093  ·  47Comments

ewierschke picture ewierschke  ·  36Comments

jonaspetersorensen picture jonaspetersorensen  ·  32Comments

srusru picture srusru  ·  44Comments