You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
βοΈ security issue or vulnerability => Please see policy
β support request => Please see note at the top of this template.
What is the current behavior?
The following code fails at deploy time (CF) with the following error message from the custom resource Cannot specify more than one prefix rule in a filter.
(creates, behind the scene, multiple LambdaFunctionConfigurations (or other configurations types) for the user)
What is the motivation / use case for changing the behavior or adding this feature?
Avoid errors, fail early, offer a user friendly API
Please tell us about your environment:
CDK CLI Version: 1.0.0
Module Version: 1.0.0
OS: all
Language: all
Other information (e.g. detailed explanation, stacktraces, related issues, suggestions how to fix, links for us to have context, eg. associated pull-request, stackoverflow, gitter, etc)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Avoid CF deploy time errors when specifying multiple prefixes or suffixes in notification filters.
Closes#3347
Possibly something to fix in v2.0 (#3398)
I'm submitting a ...
What is the current behavior?
The following code fails at deploy time (CF) with the following error message from the custom resource Cannot specify more than one prefix rule in a filter.
This is because
FilterRules
inputBucketNotificationConfiguration
expects a list of at most two different elements (one prefix and one suffix).Since the following is possible:
and equivalent to
There's actually no need for multiple filters with the current implementation...
The CDK can/should do better than this...
Throw when specifying multiple prefixes/suffixes.
Ideally, the following API should be possible:
(creates, behind the scene, multiple
LambdaFunctionConfigurations
(or other configurations types) for the user)What is the motivation / use case for changing the behavior or adding this feature?
Avoid errors, fail early, offer a user friendly API
Please tell us about your environment:
Other information (e.g. detailed explanation, stacktraces, related issues, suggestions how to fix, links for us to have context, eg. associated pull-request, stackoverflow, gitter, etc)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: