Skip to content

Conversation

mazyu36
Copy link
Contributor

@mazyu36 mazyu36 commented Mar 8, 2025

Issue # (if applicable)

N/A

Reason for this change

I encountered this problem when fixing a bug. This PR fixes an issue where we cannot rerun test/aws-efs/test/integ.efs-transition.js.

When attempting to rerun this test, the following error is encountered:

The ThroughputMode value for the file system does not support TransitionToArchive. Either change the ThroughputMode value to Elastic or remove the TransitionToArchive parameter.

When throughputMode is undefined, throughput mode is set to Bursting.
However, transitionToArchive is only supported in the Elastic throughput mode. (Ref)

The Archive storage class is available only for file systems that use the Elastic throughput mode and the General Purpose performance mode.

Description of changes

Set throughputMode to Elastic when transitionToArchivePolicy is specified in a unit test and an integ test.
I also considered adding validations. However, I decided against it as it might cause regression issues.

Describe any new or updated permissions being added

Nothing

Description of how you validated changes

Successfully reran the integration test.

Checklist


By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache-2.0 license

@aws-cdk-automation aws-cdk-automation requested a review from a team March 8, 2025 09:41
@github-actions github-actions bot added p2 distinguished-contributor [Pilot] contributed 50+ PRs to the CDK labels Mar 8, 2025
…s specified and `throughputMode` is `undefined`
Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 8, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 82.37%. Comparing base (6c882e0) to head (29ba225).
Report is 16 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #33713      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   82.21%   82.37%   +0.16%     
==========================================
  Files         119      120       +1     
  Lines        6876     6933      +57     
  Branches     1162     1169       +7     
==========================================
+ Hits         5653     5711      +58     
+ Misses       1120     1119       -1     
  Partials      103      103              
Flag Coverage Δ
suite.unit 82.37% <ø> (+0.16%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Components Coverage Δ
packages/aws-cdk ∅ <ø> (∅)
packages/aws-cdk-lib/core 82.37% <ø> (+0.16%) ⬆️
🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

@aws-cdk-automation aws-cdk-automation added the pr/needs-community-review This PR needs a review from a Trusted Community Member or Core Team Member. label Mar 8, 2025
@go-to-k
Copy link
Contributor

go-to-k commented Mar 8, 2025

I also considered adding validations. However, I decided against it as it might cause regression issues.

I thought we could add the validations too and it made sense. But what kind of regression do you think we will see?

@mazyu36
Copy link
Contributor Author

mazyu36 commented Mar 9, 2025

@go-to-k
Thank you for the comment.

The old integration test seems to have worked previously.
I'm concerned that adding validations might affect existing deployments.

What do you think about this?

@go-to-k
Copy link
Contributor

go-to-k commented Mar 9, 2025

@mazyu36

I see. If it doesn't currently work even without validation, like this integ, I didn't think it would be a problem to add validation. However, it is not so necessary that it is forced to be added, so let's leave it as it is just to be safe.

@aws-cdk-automation aws-cdk-automation added pr/needs-maintainer-review This PR needs a review from a Core Team Member and removed pr/needs-community-review This PR needs a review from a Trusted Community Member or Core Team Member. labels Mar 9, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

@GavinZZ GavinZZ left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you for the fix!

Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented Mar 10, 2025

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).

@aws-cdk-automation aws-cdk-automation removed the pr/needs-maintainer-review This PR needs a review from a Core Team Member label Mar 10, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented Mar 10, 2025

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).

@aws-cdk-automation
Copy link
Collaborator

AWS CodeBuild CI Report

  • CodeBuild project: AutoBuildv2Project1C6BFA3F-wQm2hXv2jqQv
  • Commit ID: a408099
  • Result: SUCCEEDED
  • Build Logs (available for 30 days)

Powered by github-codebuild-logs, available on the AWS Serverless Application Repository

Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented Mar 10, 2025

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).

@mergify mergify bot merged commit 842201c into aws:main Mar 10, 2025
14 checks passed
Copy link
Contributor

Comments on closed issues and PRs are hard for our team to see.
If you need help, please open a new issue that references this one.

@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Mar 10, 2025
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

distinguished-contributor [Pilot] contributed 50+ PRs to the CDK p2

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants