Incomplete first pass of underpass new infrastructure #472
Conversation
dakotabenjamin
force-pushed
the
update/terraform
branch
from
f9e4f5e
to
79f5caf
Compare
| container_min_count = 1 | ||
| container_max_count = 5 | ||
| } | ||
| service_subnets = module.vpc.public_subnets |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This will create the containers in public subnets. No change if this is what you want. But the module does not assign public IP to the containers. Yet.
If they are going to be behind a load balancer, it is safe to put them in private subnets.
| } | ||
| service_subnets = module.vpc.public_subnets | ||
| aws_vpc_id = module.vpc.vpc_id | ||
| service_security_groups = [module.vpc.default_security_group_id] // update for update |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
One of the two security groups output by the ALB module - load_balancer_app_security_group can be added here directly.
| service_subnets = module.vpc.public_subnets | ||
| aws_vpc_id = module.vpc.vpc_id | ||
| service_security_groups = [module.vpc.default_security_group_id] // update for update | ||
| alb_security_group = module.alb.load_balancer_app_security_group //public or private |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is not required. I have removed it from the module.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ope, yeah missed this.
| data "aws_acm_certificate" "wildcard" { | ||
| domain = "hotosm.org" | ||
| statuses = ["ISSUED"] | ||
| most_recent = true |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please add additional line for reliability:
key_types = ["RSA_2048", "RSA_3072", "RSA_4096", "EC_prime256v1", "EC_secp384r1", "EC_secp521r1"]
AWS API by default only returns RSA certs unless you give it a list of cert types to consider. Granted we have RSA cert for our home domain. But this prepares for future.
| resource "aws_secretsmanager_secret_version" "configfile" { | ||
| secret_id = aws_secretsmanager_secret.configfile.id | ||
| secret_string = base64encode( | ||
| templatefile( | ||
| "${path.module}/config.txt.tftpl", | ||
| { | ||
| underpass_db_creds = var.underpass_db_credentials | ||
|
|
||
| oauth2_creds = var.oauth2_credentials | ||
|
|
||
| api_url = "${var.api_url_scheme}${var.api_host}" | ||
| api_port = var.api_port | ||
| api_export_max_area = var.api_export_max_area | ||
| api_log_level = var.api_log_level | ||
|
|
||
| sentry_dsn = lookup(var.sentry, "dsn") | ||
| sentry_app_environment = var.deployment_environment | ||
| sentry_app_release_tag = "underpass-api@${var.container_image_tag}" | ||
| } | ||
| ) | ||
| ) | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nice. We need app releases to be done by terraform for the sentry tags to be set properly. Or we need to at least run terraform after every deployment.
| @@ -123,7 +125,7 @@ resource "aws_security_group" "database" { | |||
| from_port = 5432 | |||
| to_port = 5432 | |||
| protocol = "tcp" | |||
| security_groups = [aws_security_group.api.id, aws_security_group.app.id] | |||
| security_groups = [module.vpc.default_security_group_id] | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This ingress block can be removed. The self ingress block alone should be sufficient. We can simply add this security_group_id as one of the service security groups in the ECS service.
| Role = "Database server" | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| resource "aws_db_proxy" "galaxy" { | ||
| name = "galaxy" | ||
| resource "aws_db_proxy" "underpass" { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If app and DB are in the same VPC we can skip creating the proxy resource.
| resource "aws_db_proxy_target" "underpass" { | ||
| db_instance_identifier = aws_db_instance.underpass.id | ||
| db_proxy_name = aws_db_proxy.underpass.name | ||
| target_group_name = aws_db_proxy_default_target_group.underpass.name | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We can skip all other proxy related resources if we skip the proxy resource.
DO NOT MERGE
I wanted to put out some progress and outline some blockers I still need to address before we can say its in a deployable state: