Being able to capture infrastructure in a single Terraform file has obvious benefits. However, I am not clear in my mind how - once, for example, a virtual machine has been created - subsequent updates are handled.
So, to provide a specific scenario. Suppose that using Terraform we set up an Azure vm with SQL Server 2014. Then, after a month we decide that we should like to update that vm with the latest service pack for SQL Server 2014 that has just been released.
Is the recommended practice that we update the Terraform configuration file and re-apply it?
I have to disagree with the other two responses. Terraform can handle infrastructure updates just fine. The key thing to understand, however, is that Terraform largely follows an immutable infrastructure paradigm, which means that to "update" a resource, you delete the old resource and create a new one to replace it. This is much like functional programming, where variables are immutable, and to "update" something, you actually create a new variable.
The typical pattern with Terraform is to use it to deploy a server image, such as an Virtual Machine (VM) Image (e.g. an Amazon Machine Image (AMI)) or a Container Image (e.g. a Docker Image). When you want to "update" something, you create a new version of your image, deploy that onto a new server, and undeploy the old server.
Here's an example of how that works:
Imagine that you're building a Ruby on Rails app. You get the app working in dev and it's time to deploy to prod. The first step is to package the app as an AMI. You could do this using a tool like Packer. Now you have an AMI with id ami-1234.
Here is a Terraform template you could use to deploy this AMI on a server (an EC2 Instance) in AWS with an Elastic IP Address attached to it:
resource "aws_instance" "example" {
ami = "ami-1234"
instance_type = "t2.micro"
}
resource "aws_eip" "example" {
instance = "${aws_instance.example.id}"
}
When you run terraform apply, Terraform deploys the server, attaches an IP address to it, and now when users visit that IP, they will see v1 of your Rails app.
Some time later, you update your Rails app and want to deploy the new version, v2. To do that, you build a new AMI (i.e. you run Packer again) to get an ami with ID "ami-5678". You update your Terraform templates accordingly:
resource "aws_instance" "example" {
ami = "ami-5678"
instance_type = "t2.micro"
}
When you run terraform apply, Terraform undeploys the old server (which it can find because Terraform records the state of your infrastructure), deploys a new server with the new AMI, and now users will see v2 of your code at that same IP.
Of course, there is one problem here: in between the time when Terraform undeploys v1 and when it deploys v2, your users would see downtime. To work around that, you could use Terraform's create_before_destroy lifecycle setting:
resource "aws_instance" "example" {
ami = "ami-5678"
instance_type = "t2.micro"
lifecycle {
create_before_destroy = true
}
}
With create_before_destroy set to true, Terraform will create the replacement server first, switch the IP to it, and then remove the old server. This allows you to do zero-downtime deployment with immutable infrastructure (note: zero-downtime deployment works better with a load balancer that can do health checks than a simple IP address, especially if your server takes a long time to boot).
For more information on this, check out the book Terraform: Up & Running. The code samples for the book include an example of a zero-downtime deployment with a cluster of servers and a load balancer: https://github.com/brikis98/terraform-up-and-running-code
Terraform is an infrastructure provision tool, th configuration/deployment tools will be:
chef
saltstack
ansible
etc.,
As I am working with chef, so basically, I provision the server instance by terraform, then terraform (terraform provisioner) handles the control to chef for system configuration and deployment.
For the moment, terraform cannot delete the node/client in chef server, so after you terraform destroy, you need remove them by yourself.
Terraform isn't best placed for this sort of task. Terraform is an infrastructure management tool, not configuration management.
You should use tools such as chef, puppet, and ansible to deal with the configuration of the system.
If you must use terraform for this task; you could create a template_file resource and place in the configuration required to install the SQL server, and how to upgrade if a different version is presented. Reference: here
Put that code inside a provisioner under the null_resource resource. reference: here.
The trigger for this could be the variable containing the SQL version. So, when you present a different version of SQL it'll execute that provisioner on each instance to upgrade the versions.
Related
I have a set of cloud run services created/maintained via terraform cloud.
When I create a new version, a github actions workflow pushes a new image to gcr.io.
Now in a normal scenario, I'd call:
gcloud run deploy auth-service --image gcr.io/riu-production/auth-service:latest
And a new version would be up. If I do this and the resource is managed by terraform, on the next run, terraform apply will fail saying it can't create that cloud run service due to a service with that name already existing. So it drifts apart in state and terraform no longer recognizes it.
A simple solution is to connect the pipeline to terraform cloud and run terraform apply -auto-approve for deployment purposes. That should work.
The problem with that is I really realy don't want to apply terraform commands in a pipeline, for now.
And the biggest one is I really would like to keep terraform out of the deployment process altogether.
Is there any way to force cloud run to take that new image for a service without messing up the terraform infrastructure?
Cloud run configs:
resource "google_cloud_run_service" "auth-service" {
name = "auth-service"
location = var.gcp_region
project = var.gcp_project
template {
spec {
service_account_name = module.cloudrun-sa.email
containers {
image = "gcr.io/${var.gcp_project}/auth-service:latest"
}
}
}
traffic {
percent = 100
latest_revision = true
}
}
In theory yes it should be possible ...
But I would recommend against that, you should be doing terraform apply on every deployment to guarantee the infrastructure is as expected.
Here are some things you can try:
Keep track of when it changes and use the import on that resource:
https://registry.terraform.io/providers/hashicorp/google/latest/docs/resources/cloud_run_service#import
Look into lifecycle ignore, you can ignore the attribute that triggers the change:
https://www.terraform.io/language/meta-arguments/lifecycle#ignore_changes
Background
I was kind of dropped into an IaC project that uses Packer => Terraform => Ansible to create RHEL Virtual Machines on an on-prem VMware Vsphere cluster.
Our vmware module registers output variables that we use once the VMs are created, those variables feed a local_file resource template to build an Ansible inventory with the vm names and some other variables.
Ansible is then run using local_exec with the above created inventory to do configuration actions and run scripts both on the newly deployed VM's and against some external management applications, for example to join the VM to a domain (FreeIPA, sadly no TF good provider is available).
Issue Description
The issue that I have been wrestling with is when we run a terraform destroy (or apply with some VM count changes that destroy a VM resource), we would like to be able to repeat the process in reverse.
Capture the names of the VMs to be destroyed(Output vars from resource creation) so they can be removed from the IPA domain and have some general cleanup.
We've tried different approaches with Destroy Time Provisioners and it just seems like it would require a fundamental change in the approach outlined above to make that work.
Question
I'm wondering if there is a way to get an output variable on destroy that could be used to populate a list the VMs that would be removed.
So far my search has turned up nothing. Thanks for your time.
In general, it is good to plan first, even when destroying:
terraform plan -destroy -out tfplan
Then, you you can proceed with the destroy:
terraform apply tfplan
But at this moment (or before actual destroy), you have a plan what was destroyed, and you can do any analysis or automation on it. Example:
terraform show -json tfplan | jq > tfplan.json
Source:
https://learn.hashicorp.com/tutorials/terraform/plan
I am using Terraform scripts to create azure services, I am having some doubts regarding Terraform,
1) If I have one environment let say dev in azure having some azure resources how can I copy all the resources to new environment lest say prod using terraform script.
2)what are the impact of re-run the terraform file with additional azure resources, what it will do.
3)What if I want to create an app service with the same name from Terraform script that already present in the azure will it update the resource or do nothing after terraform execution completed.
Please feel free to answer the question, it will be great help.
To answer your questions:
You could create a new workspace with terraform workspace new and copy all configuration files (.tf) to the new environment, then run terraform init, plan, apply.
The terraform will compare the content in your current state file with your configuration file, then update the new attributes or creating new resources other than re-creating the existing resources.
You could run terraform import to import existing infrastructure into Terraform. For referencing existing resources in the portal, you can use data sources.
I am running Jenkins jobs to create a Azure instance and that will run terraform script to do this task.The terraform script will create NIC first and later it will create VM.Sometimes the NIC creation is taking too long in Azure environment and Vm creation steps are getting executed before NIC fully created.Is there any way so that Script should go to next step only when NIC creation is done fully.Can someone help?
What you will need to do is define the NIC as an explicit dependency on the VM in the Terraform. There are odd cases when you have to do it that way. So on the VM you just need to add the depends on property and the resource. If the resource is created outside of terraform you may have to use a datasource to load it in.
resource "azurerm_virtual_machine" "main" {
name = "${var.prefix}-vm"
depends_on = [azurerm_network_interface.main]
}
The docs:
https://www.terraform.io/docs/configuration/resources.html#depends_on-explicit-resource-dependencies
My deployment workflow is first creating ami with Packer, then deploy using Terraform.
I have a EC2-class, which was created before 2013, so there's no default VPC configured.
When I run packer build packer.json, the tool complains that
amazon-ebs: Adding tag: "Name": "Packer Builder"
==> amazon-ebs: Error launching source instance: VPCResourceNotSpecified: The specified instance type can only be used in a VPC. A subnet ID or network interface ID is required to carry out the request.
==> amazon-ebs: status code: 400, request id: 35ca5736-f808-4bb9-9a34-3dca24b59259
I was planning to create VPC with Terraform. So the question is, what is the order of execution? Run Terraform first, then Packer. Or run in reverse order? Or, we split out the network configuration (VPC), use Terraform to deploy it once, then followed by Packer, and then terraform the rest of the servers?
Update:
If I use the strategy:
run Network module (mostly static things), followed by Packer, and then run "Frequently changing things" module, how do I share state between Terraform and Packer? Meaning, once I created a new VPC, how do I let Packer know about this new vpc_id? Do I need to modify every Packer file?
The general advice is to split the terraform configuration into reasonable sized parts.
For a small setup it's reasonable is to split it into mostly static things (VPC, subnet, routes, etc). Frequently changing things (EC2, SG, etc). This would also solve your dependency cycle.