feat(route53-targets): add AppSync route53 target

[ScottRobinson03]

Issue # (if applicable)

Closes #26109

Reason for this change

This PR adds support for creating alias records on AppSync's GraphqlApi.

Description of changes

• Add appsync-target.ts file, with the AppSync class.
• Add unit tests for this new AppSync target class.
• Update README.md of aws-cdk-lib/aws-route53-targets

Description of how you validated changes

• Add unit tests

Checklist

• My code adheres to the CONTRIBUTING GUIDE and DESIGN GUIDELINES

---

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

[aws-cdk-automation]

The pull request linter has failed. See the aws-cdk-automation comment below for failure reasons. If you believe this pull request should receive an exemption, please comment and provide a justification.

A comment requesting an exemption should contain the text Exemption Request. Additionally, if clarification is needed add Clarification Request to a comment.

[ScottRobinson03]

Clarification Request

I've written an integration test, but when trying to run it from aws-cdk/packages/@aws-cdk-testing/framework-integ via yarn integ --update-on-failed integ.appsync-target.js (as per the instructions) I'm getting the following error:

Trying to debug I thought maybe I have to build things first, so I ran yarn build, but that then spews out a load of the following:

Running yarn install says "Already up-to-date", so I'm not sure what's going on or how I'm meant to do run the added integration test. Assistance is appreciated.

[paulhcsun]

Hey Scott, I don't see anything incorrect in your integ test file. I would recommend just running a full clean rebuild with

$ git clean -fqdx .
$ yarn install
$ yarn build

and see if that resolves the import error.

[ScottRobinson03]

Hey Scott, I don't see anything incorrect in your integ test file. I would recommend just running a full clean rebuild with

$ git clean -fqdx .
$ yarn install
$ yarn build

and see if that resolves the import error.

@paulhcsun Thanks, this did indeed fix the issue and I'm now able run the test. Although, as the comment within the file kinda says (copied from the route53-targets ApiGateway integ test), it's a somewhat redundant test since the stack can never deploy due to the hardcoded certificate & hosted zone arns.

When running (via yarn integ --update-on-failed aws-route53-targets/test/integ.appsync-target.js) I get the following output:

I think this means I need a "Exemption Request".

[paulhcsun]

Hey Scott, I don't see anything incorrect in your integ test file. I would recommend just running a full clean rebuild with

$ git clean -fqdx .
$ yarn install
$ yarn build

and see if that resolves the import error.

@paulhcsun Thanks, this did indeed fix the issue and I'm now able run the test. Although, as the comment within the file kinda says (copied from the route53-targets ApiGateway integ test), it's a somewhat redundant test since the stack can never deploy due to the hardcoded certificate & hosted zone arns.

When running (via yarn integ --update-on-failed aws-route53-targets/test/integ.appsync-target.js) I get the following output:

I think this means I need a "Exemption Request".

Awesome! And gotcha, let me just confirm with the team member who added that explanation and if there's no other way to test this then I can add the integ teste exempted label.

Edit:

Actually it seems like there are some integ tests for the specific targets, for example this one for interface-vpc-endpoint-target. Would you be able to reference these tests and write out for AppSync as a target as well?

[ScottRobinson03]

Actually it seems like there are some integ tests for the specific targets, for example this one for interface-vpc-endpoint-target. Would you be able to reference these tests and write out for AppSync as a target as well?

@paulhcsun I believe the key difference with API Gateway and AppSync is that they both require a certificate to be created in order to have a custom domain.

The other route53-targets (such as interface-vpc-endpoint-target) don't require this certificate, which is why integ tests are possible.

It's not entirely clear to me why having a certificate makes it impossible to integ test, but that's how the API Gateway integ tests' comment reads to me.

If I'm misunderstanding then please advise accordingly.

[mazyu36]

Hi.
Just for information, to run a test that requires a domain and a certificate, you'll need to set up a domain and configure it in the Environment Variables before running an integ test.

This requirement is noted in the following docs:
https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/main/packages/%40aws-cdk-testing/framework-integ/README.md

I've recently created an integ test that requires a domain:
https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/pull/30784/files#diff-f22841cd9a989a8be48e18db20b731abb510c127c0c9f7dc07e953b702a7a385

Do you have a domain available for an integ test?
If not, it won't be possible to run the integ test.

✅ Updated pull request passes all PRLinter validations. Dismissing previous PRLinter review.

[ScottRobinson03]

Thanks for this @mazyu36, I was able to get a passing integ test running: fd783f7

Note that the submitted snapshot has dummy values, since I don't want to leak my domain/certificate/hostedzone.

I think this means I no longer require an exemption, but not sure how to cancel the request.

[ScottRobinson03]

The CodeBuild is failing because it's not providing a certificate arn env var:

What's the correct way to fix this? I suppose I need to somehow tell CodeBuild to not run this specific test? Not sure...

[mazyu36]

I’m not entirely confident, but I commented based on my experience from when I previously ran the integ test that uses a domain.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 78.42%. Comparing base (8ccdff4) to head (17eb322).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #31976      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   78.45%   78.42%   -0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         106      106              
  Lines        7208     7208              
  Branches     1323     1323              
==========================================
- Hits         5655     5653       -2     
- Misses       1365     1368       +3     
+ Partials      188      187       -1     

Flag	Coverage Δ
suite.unit	78.42% <ø> (-0.03%)	⬇️

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

Components	Coverage Δ
packages/aws-cdk	78.42% <ø> (-0.03%)	⬇️

[mazyu36]

Thanks!

[GavinZZ]

Left a nit comment on the AppSync target naming

Pull request has been modified.

[mergify]

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]

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).

Pull request has been modified.

[mergify]

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]

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).

[GavinZZ]

@mergify update

[mergify]

update

☑️ Nothing to do

• #commits-behind > 0 [📌 update requirement]
• -closed [📌 update requirement]
• -conflict [📌 update requirement]
• queue-position = -1 [📌 update requirement]

[ScottRobinson03]

If I'm interpreting the checks correctly, it looks like this isn't being merged because the code coverage apparently decreased... I'm not quite sure what to do about this, since my changes do have appropriate tests (as far as I can tell).

@GavinZZ are you able to give any insight on this?

[GavinZZ]

@mergify update

[mergify]

update

✅ Branch has been successfully updated

[GavinZZ]

Code coverage is something we introduced and I believe there's still some issue with it. Will reach out to the team internally to see what's going on and update you once I hear back.

[aws-cdk-automation]

AWS CodeBuild CI Report

• CodeBuild project: AutoBuildv2Project1C6BFA3F-wQm2hXv2jqQv
• Commit ID: 17eb322
• Result: SUCCEEDED
• Build Logs (available for 30 days)

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

[mergify]

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).

[github-actions]

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.