Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

VAULT-29784: Skip connection verification on DB config read #28139

Merged
merged 10 commits into from
Aug 21, 2024

Conversation

davidadeleon
Copy link
Contributor

@davidadeleon davidadeleon commented Aug 21, 2024

Description

This PR solves a potential delay in reading existing DB connection configurations. When adding a computed running_plugin_version field to the response when reading a database configuration, we introduced the possibility of adding additional latency to this read request while attempting to verify the connection regardless of whether or not verify_connection was set to false in the config. In the event that there was additional latency introduced, this had the potential of causing Terraform runs, or any other workflow that depended upon reading numerous DB connections, to take longer than expected. In the Terraform case this could lead to timeouts causing failures. This PR forces the skipping of the connection verification on DB configuration read. A side effect of this implementation is that we also respect the verify_connection parameter further in the DB connection process during initialization which will result in slightly different error messaging in the event of a failed connection during a DB operation where the connection is not set to verify. If the configuration is set to skip verification, the connection is attempted and the error bubbles up, but will no longer be wrapped in a error verifying connection error message. This is not only clearer, but more in-line with what is expected based on configuration.

TODO only if you're a HashiCorp employee

  • Backport Labels: If this PR is in the ENT repo and needs to be backported, backport
    to N, N-1, and N-2, using the backport/ent/x.x.x+ent labels. If this PR is in the CE repo, you should only backport to N, using the backport/x.x.x label, not the enterprise labels.
    • [N/A] If this fixes a critical security vulnerability or severity 1 bug, it will also need to be backported to the current LTS versions of Vault. To ensure this, use all available enterprise labels.
  • [N/A] ENT Breakage: If this PR either 1) removes a public function OR 2) changes the signature
    of a public function, even if that change is in a CE file, double check that
    applying the patch for this PR to the ENT repo and running tests doesn't
    break any tests. Sometimes ENT only tests rely on public functions in CE
    files.
  • Jira: If this change has an associated Jira, it's referenced either
    in the PR description, commit message, or branch name.
  • [N/A] RFC: If this change has an associated RFC, please link it in the description.
  • [N/A] ENT PR: If this change has an associated ENT PR, please link it in the
    description. Also, make sure the changelog is in this PR, not in your ENT PR.

@davidadeleon davidadeleon added this to the 1.17.4 milestone Aug 21, 2024
@davidadeleon davidadeleon requested a review from a team as a code owner August 21, 2024 16:25
@github-actions github-actions bot added the hashicorp-contributed-pr If the PR is HashiCorp (i.e. not-community) contributed label Aug 21, 2024
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Aug 21, 2024

CI Results:
All Go tests succeeded! ✅

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Aug 21, 2024

Build Results:
All builds succeeded! ✅

@@ -392,6 +393,7 @@ func (b *databaseBackend) connectionReadHandler() framework.OperationFunc {
}

resp.Data = structs.New(config).Map()
delete(resp.Data, "verify_connection")
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This seems like something we could keep in the response.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I was on the fence on this as well. I agree we can probably keep it so I'll remove that line!

@davidadeleon davidadeleon merged commit fe44e55 into main Aug 21, 2024
83 checks passed
@davidadeleon davidadeleon deleted the davidadeleon/vault-29784 branch August 21, 2024 20:43
@davidadeleon davidadeleon added the backport/ent/1.16.x+ent Changes are backported to 1.16.x+ent label Aug 21, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
backport/ent/1.16.x+ent Changes are backported to 1.16.x+ent hashicorp-contributed-pr If the PR is HashiCorp (i.e. not-community) contributed
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants