add partition_count argument to aws_placement_group

[ys56]

・Fix #7754

AWS added partition placement group feature which uses partition_count argument, so I added partiton_count argument to set the number.

Changes proposed in this pull request:

• Added partition_count argument to aws_placement_group

Output from acceptance testing:

$  make testacc TEST=./aws TESTARGS='-run=TestAccAWSPlacementGroup'
==> Checking that code complies with gofmt requirements...
TF_ACC=1 go test ./aws -v -parallel 20 -run=TestAccAWSPlacementGroup -timeout 120m
=== RUN   TestAccAWSPlacementGroup_basic
=== PAUSE TestAccAWSPlacementGroup_basic
=== RUN   TestAccAWSPlacementGroup_partition
=== PAUSE TestAccAWSPlacementGroup_partition
=== CONT  TestAccAWSPlacementGroup_basic
=== CONT  TestAccAWSPlacementGroup_partition
--- PASS: TestAccAWSPlacementGroup_partition (7.83s)
--- PASS: TestAccAWSPlacementGroup_basic (8.20s)
PASS
ok  	github.com/terraform-providers/terraform-provider-aws/aws	8.218s

And bellows are sample partition placement group which acctest has created.

$ aws ec2 describe-placement-groups
{
    "PlacementGroups": [
        {
            "GroupName": "tf-acc-test-7259013876622124670",
            "State": "available",
            "Strategy": "partition",
            "PartitionCount": 7
        }
    ]
}

[bflad]

Hi @ys56 👋 Would you prefer to fix feedback in this pull request or have it adjusted in #7777?

[ys56]

Hi @bflad ,
thanks for your reviewing.
Well, I’d like to fix in this pull request unless it breaks #7777 .

[ys56]

Hi @bflad
If it is easier for you to review in #7777 , I don't mind and please proceed that way because our team would like to import our partition placement group to our tf files.

Thanks,
Yu

[ys56]

Hi @ziggythehamster
Thanks for reviewing my commit !
I have reflected your review.

[Monpoke]

Hello @ziggythehamster !

Could you please review this commit?
It's been a while this MR is opened and I think it would be really useful for a lot of people using AWS.

Thanks.

[AlexanderKaraberov]

Hello,
Just wanted to ask whether it's possible that this PR will land before the next terraform-provider-aws release? Partition placement groups is an important feature for almost all cases to deploy a distributed database system. For instance in our case we need this to deploy a CouchDB cluster. Currently when we create a placement group with a partition strategy, AWS API fallbacks to a default partition_count of 2 which is not always useful.

Thanks!

[ziggythehamster]

It looks good to me - I'm already running a fork containing this PR because I desperately needed this feature, but that is of course not great. Hopefully someone at Hashicorp can work this through. You do have some conflicts though.

[ys56]

Hi @ziggythehamster , @Monpoke , @AlexanderKaraberov ,
Thanks for reviewing and mentioning my pull request!

Well, I have rebased latest master and resolve some conflicts.
And below is new test results.

[ec2-user@ip-172-31-7-27 terraform-provider-aws]$ make testacc TEST=./aws TESTARGS='-run=TestAccAWSPlacementGroup'
==> Checking that code complies with gofmt requirements...
TF_ACC=1 go test ./aws -v -count 1 -parallel 20 -run=TestAccAWSPlacementGroup -timeout 120m
=== RUN   TestAccAWSPlacementGroup_basic
=== PAUSE TestAccAWSPlacementGroup_basic
=== RUN   TestAccAWSPlacementGroup_tags
=== PAUSE TestAccAWSPlacementGroup_tags
=== RUN   TestAccAWSPlacementGroup_disappears
=== PAUSE TestAccAWSPlacementGroup_disappears
=== RUN   TestAccAWSPlacementGroup_partition
=== PAUSE TestAccAWSPlacementGroup_partition
=== CONT  TestAccAWSPlacementGroup_basic
=== CONT  TestAccAWSPlacementGroup_partition
=== CONT  TestAccAWSPlacementGroup_disappears
=== CONT  TestAccAWSPlacementGroup_tags
--- PASS: TestAccAWSPlacementGroup_disappears (11.74s)
--- PASS: TestAccAWSPlacementGroup_partition (14.75s)
--- PASS: TestAccAWSPlacementGroup_basic (15.04s)
--- PASS: TestAccAWSPlacementGroup_tags (33.64s)
PASS
ok  	github.com/terraform-providers/terraform-provider-aws/aws	33.681s

I'd like @bflad or other Hashicorp members to re-review my new commits.

regards,

[ziggythehamster]

I also would like them to review this (and #7777). It's not fun maintaining a fork! :)

[chrisschaaf]

Approving based on our experience - have had this working in a forked repo for ~9 months. Would love to get this integrated here!

[ziggythehamster]

I'm using the fork in #7777 for some time now (and updated for latest provider release, see: https://github.com/art19/terraform-provider-aws/tree/art19-v2.53.0) without issue.

[ziggythehamster]

There is a newer, merging, almost identical PR in #15360. I'm not sure how to poke Hashicorp to review and merge either of these though :(

[ewbankkit]

@ys56 Thanks for the contribution 🎉 👏.
Superseded by #15360.

[github-actions]

I'm going to lock this pull request because it has been closed for 30 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active issues.
If you have found a problem that seems related to this change, please open a new issue and complete the issue template so we can capture all the details necessary to investigate further.