fix(cli): garbage collection ignores review_in_progress stacks#31906
fix(cli): garbage collection ignores review_in_progress stacks#31906mergify[bot] merged 2 commits intomainfrom
Conversation
aws-cdk-automation
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The pull request linter has failed. See the aws-cdk-automation comment below for failure reasons. If you believe this pull request should receive an exemption, please comment and provide a justification.
A comment requesting an exemption should contain the text Exemption Request. Additionally, if clarification is needed add Clarification Request to a comment.
|
➡️ PR build request submitted to A maintainer must now check the pipeline and add the |
AWS CodeBuild CI Report
Powered by github-codebuild-logs, available on the AWS Serverless Application Repository |
✅ Updated pull request passes all PRLinter validations. Dismissing previous PRLinter review.
|
Thank you for contributing! Your pull request will be updated from main and then merged automatically (do not update manually, and be sure to allow changes to be pushed to your fork). |
|
Comments on closed issues and PRs are hard for our team to see. |
Calling this a feat because I believe technically we are updating the functionality of gc.
Previously we were waiting for stacks in
REVIEW_IN_PROGRESSto land, because that is the one CFN state that you cannot retrieve a template for (because it doesn't exist yet). However in environments where we are constantly deploying new stacks (like our test environments), we may never get to a state in the allotted time where no stacks areREVIEW_IN_PROGRESS.Instead, we are going to ignore
REVIEW_IN_PROGRESSstacks. This will introduce a subtle race condition where a previously isolated asset becomes in-use by theREVIEW_IN_PROGRESSstack before it turns into aCREATE_IN_PROGRESSstack and we can reference its stack. If garbage collection happens to come across the isolated asset while the stack isREVIEW_IN_PROGRESS(aka before it isCREATE_IN_PROGRESSbut after CDK has verified that the assets exist) we will garbage collect the asset. However, we don't expect this to become a big problem in practice.By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache-2.0 license