Error: ID was missing the AuthorizationRules element

[tamland]

Community Note

• Please vote on this issue by adding a 👍 reaction to the original issue to help the community and maintainers prioritize this request
• Please do not leave "+1" or "me too" comments, they generate extra noise for issue followers and do not help prioritize the request
• If you are interested in working on this issue or have submitted a pull request, please leave a comment

Terraform (and AzureRM Provider) Version

Terraform v0.12.23
provider.azurerm v2.14.0

Affected Resource(s)

• azurerm_eventhub_namespace_authorization_rule

Terraform Configuration Files

resource "azurerm_eventhub_namespace_authorization_rule" "test" {
  name                = "test"
  namespace_name      = azurerm_eventhub_namespace.main.name
  resource_group_name = azurerm_resource_group.main.name
  listen              = true
  send                = false
  manage              = false
}

Debug Output

https://gist.github.com/tamland/5bb469945bffe493b16d8ca4efd0fc5b

Expected Behavior

Actual Behavior

apply fails with error ID was missing the ``AuthorizationRules`` element. Subsequent runs of plan fails with same error. The resource is created and added to state file.

Steps to Reproduce

1. terraform apply

Important Factoids

References

[logachev]

It looks like a regression from this PR: #7248

Looking at some previous PRs around it, it looks like new SDK expects lower case authorizationRule instead of upper case. @tombuildsstuff

[neil-yechenwei]

@tombuildsstuff , seems StateUpgrader doesn't take effect so that the segment is still authorizationRules. So then it failed to parse resource id with segment AuthorizationRules.

[evertonmc]

#7147 (comment)

meaning that all EventHub Namespace Authorization Rules will have their Resource ID updated from the old (authorizationRules) to the new (AuthorizationRules).

@tombuildsstuff do I get it right? Actually the new resource is authorizationRules and #7248 did completely the opposite, which now leads to this one?

Is that introduced AuthorizationRules correct, when the new API uses authorizationRules?

[ghost]

This has been released in version 2.18.0 of the provider. Please see the Terraform documentation on provider versioning or reach out if you need any assistance upgrading. As an example:

provider "azurerm" {
    version = "~> 2.18.0"
}
# ... other configuration ...

[ghost]

I'm going to lock this issue because it has been closed for 30 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active issues.

If you feel this issue should be reopened, we encourage creating a new issue linking back to this one for added context. If you feel I made an error 🤖 🙉 , please reach out to my human friends 👉 hashibot-feedback@hashicorp.com. Thanks!