azurerm_redis_cache - tighten validation for sku_name, family, capacity

[wyattfry]

Community Note

• Please vote on this PR by adding a 👍 reaction to the original PR to help the community and maintainers prioritize for review
• Please do not leave comments along the lines of "+1", "me too" or "any updates", they generate extra noise for PR followers and do not help prioritize for review

Description

This PR tightens the validation for the combination of the arguments sku_name, family and capacity to replicate that which is implemented in the Azure CLI program. This will benefit the user by providing immediate feedback on their configuration, whereas the Azure API does not reliably validate these properties.

PR Checklist

• I have followed the guidelines in our Contributing Documentation.
• I have checked to ensure there aren't other open Pull Requests for the same update/change.
• I have checked if my changes close any open issues. If so please include appropriate closing keywords below.
• I have updated/added Documentation as required written in a helpful and kind way to assist users that may be unfamiliar with the resource / data source.
• I have used a meaningful PR title to help maintainers and other users understand this change and help prevent duplicate work.
  For example: “resource_name_here - description of change e.g. adding property new_property_name_here”

Changes to existing Resource / Data Source

• I have added an explanation of what my changes do and why I'd like you to include them (This may be covered by linking to an issue above, but may benefit from additional explanation).
• I have written new tests for my resource or datasource changes & updated any relevant documentation.
• I have successfully run tests with my changes locally. If not, please provide details on testing challenges that prevented you running the tests.
• (For changes that include a state migration only). I have manually tested the migration path between relevant versions of the provider.

Testing

• My submission includes Test coverage as described in the Contribution Guide and the tests pass. (if this is not possible for any reason, please include details of why you did or could not add test coverage)

One unrelated failing acceptance test. This PR does not include any acceptance test changes because this demonstrates that existing valid configurations are still valid despite the tightened rules. If needed, an acceptance test could be added that ensures that invalid configuration triggers the new CustomizeDiffShim validation function.

Change Log

Below please provide what should go into the changelog (if anything) conforming to the Changelog Format documented here.

• azurerm_redis_cache - tighten validation for sku_name, family, capacity [azurerm_redis_cache - tighten validation for sku_name, family, capacity #29079]

This is a (please select all that apply):

• Bug Fix
• New Feature (ie adding a service, resource, or data source)
• Enhancement
• Breaking Change

Related Issue(s)

Fixes IPL-7776

Note

If this PR changes meaningfully during the course of review please update the title and description as required.

[katbyte]

whitespace is desirable here

Suggested change

	capacity := diff.Get("capacity").(int)
	validCombinations := map[string][]string{
	string(redis.SkuNameBasic): {"C0", "C1", "C2", "C3", "C4", "C5", "C6"},
	string(redis.SkuNameStandard): {"C0", "C1", "C2", "C3", "C4", "C5", "C6"},
	string(redis.SkuNamePremium): {"P1", "P2", "P3", "P4", "P5"},
	}
	familyCapacity := fmt.Sprintf("%s%d", strings.ToUpper(family), capacity)
	if !slices.Contains(validCombinations[skuName], familyCapacity) {
	capacity := diff.Get("capacity").(int)
	validCombinations := map[string][]string{
	string(redis.SkuNameBasic): {"C0", "C1", "C2", "C3", "C4", "C5", "C6"},
	string(redis.SkuNameStandard): {"C0", "C1", "C2", "C3", "C4", "C5", "C6"},
	string(redis.SkuNamePremium): {"P1", "P2", "P3", "P4", "P5"},
	}
	familyCapacity := fmt.Sprintf("%s%d", strings.ToUpper(family), capacity)
	if !slices.Contains(validCombinations[skuName], familyCapacity) {

[wyattfry]

Here is an example of what the error message looks like:

  | \t* invalid combination of `sku_name`, `family`, and `capacity`: 'Basic: P1'. Valid combinations are: map[Basic:[C0 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6] Premium:[P1 P2 P3 P4 P5] Standard:[C0 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6]]

[wyattfry]

Here's an example if it's limited to the SKU:

  | \t* invalid combination of `sku_name`, `family`, and `capacity`: 'Basic: P1'. Valid combinations for 'Basic' are: [C0 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6]

[catriona-m]

Thanks @wyattfry LGTM!

[github-actions]

I'm going to lock this pull request because it has been closed for 30 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active contributions.
If you have found a problem that seems related to this change, please open a new issue and complete the issue template so we can capture all the details necessary to investigate further.