PSS: Use interfaces to configure state stores #37899
Open
+139
−121
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
SarahFrench
added
the
no-changelog-needed
…tead of an instance of the `backend.Backend` interface.
…e, instead of directly using methods related to RPCs. This requires changing where we call `SetStateStoreChunkSize`.
To summarize, we don't really need the `SetStateStoreChunkSize` method, and instead methods like `(*GRPCProvider).ConfigureStateStore` in the `plugin6` package can directly inspect the negotiation process that passes through that code and pull out the chunk size. However that means that that code would also need to implement validation. And that's just `(*GRPCProvider).ConfigureStateStore`; what about all the test mocks that are used in different types of test? They would all need to be implemented similarly to GRPCProvider to be good, useful mocks, and then a lot of things that fulfil the provider.Interface interface are coupled to each other. Instead, it's easier to have validation in the `grpcClient` struct's methods in the `remote` package, as that code is common to all scenarios. That code needs a method to 'reach into' the provider.Interface value, so we use the `SetStateStoreChunkSize` method.
SarahFrench
force-pushed
the
pss/use-interface-configure-store
branch
from
97dd6bf to
a38298d
Compare
I'm surprised that removing this doesn't break E2E tests of PSS that use grpcwrap, but I think there's `plugin6` code that runs in that situation, so maybe chunking is handled elsewhere.
Member
Author
SarahFrench
commented
Nov 17, 2025
| if cs, ok := p.provider.(providers.StateStoreChunkSizeSetter); ok { | ||
| cs.SetStateStoreChunkSize(p.typeName, int(chunkSize)) | ||
| } else { | ||
| // TODO: Remove |
Member
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It feels like leaving this in would be helpful, any objections?
SarahFrench
commented
Nov 17, 2025
Comment on lines
-2038
to
-2056
| validateResp := provider.ValidateProviderConfig(providers.ValidateProviderConfigRequest{ | ||
| Config: providerConfigVal, | ||
| }) | ||
| diags = diags.Append(validateResp.Diagnostics) | ||
| if diags.HasErrors() { | ||
| return nil, diags | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| configureResp := provider.ConfigureProvider(providers.ConfigureProviderRequest{ | ||
| TerraformVersion: tfversion.SemVer.String(), | ||
| Config: providerConfigVal, | ||
| }) | ||
| diags = diags.Append(configureResp.Diagnostics) | ||
| if diags.HasErrors() { | ||
| return nil, diags | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // Validate and configure the state store |
Member
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this should be behind an interface similar to backend.Backend, and I guess that interface would also live in the pluggable package.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I realised that the code for calling RPC methods had leaked through the code further than intended, so this PR updates calling code in
Metamethods and ensures that configuring a state store is only done via thebackend.Backendinterface.Target Release
1.15.x
Rollback Plan
Changes to Security Controls
Are there any changes to security controls (access controls, encryption, logging) in this pull request? If so, explain.
CHANGELOG entry