terraform-provider-aws VS helmfile

⚠ There is currently an issue where the additional_configuration block order causes differences when applying the Terraform configuration without making any changes.

For Terraform, instead, a new version of the AWS module supports a dedicated resource.

If we check the support for the Terraform AWS Provider here (state for the date of publishing this article), we will see that the service is not yet fully supported. Last week, after more than half a year, support for creating a policy store was added. Additionally, we have the configuration to add template policies. However, the identity source is in the form of a PR draft, and there is no PR yet for the ability to create policies.

https://github.com/hashicorp/terraform-provider-aws/issues/3...

The size is what you get when you add every single AWS Go client into one binary.

Each service client like 1-2MB. But when you have 200 services....

Issue with EC2 Instance Metadata running inside Container

Well, at least we now have a promising lead. Some diligent googling and browsing through Github issues in the AWS provider project yielded no directly related findings. However, I did come across a few recent bug reports about the recent change AWS made regarding the treatment of public buckets. And interestingly, they described precisely the behavior I was encountering.

Latest version of TF but seems to be same Issue as this which has already been submitted : https://github.com/hashicorp/terraform-provider-aws/issues/10611

Look at this; I think the provider is just screwed up: https://github.com/hashicorp/terraform-provider-aws/issues/28672

What we’re going to install into the newly created AKS cluster is located in the helm directory. The descriptive Helmfile approach enables us to define applications and their settings in the helmfile.yaml file.

Is there any alternative to https://github.com/roboll/helmfile you are currently using in your company.

Interesting, I have approached this problem using Helmfile (https://github.com/roboll/helmfile) to define a “platform release package.”

To make managing the Helm deployments a little easier I used helmfile (https://github.com/roboll/helmfile).

But in general it's always easier to keep things quite separated. Meaning in separate helm releases. If you want to be able to manage things "together" at will, then you can use helmfile ( https://github.com/roboll/helmfile )

I agree; helm is too declarative.

Whenever I can, I use helmfile[0] for storing variables for helm since it does add a declarative layer on top of helm.

0 - https://github.com/roboll/helmfile

I went through the Helmfile repo Readme to figure out the difference between helmfile sync and helmfile apply. It seems like unlike the apply command, the sync command doesn't do a diff and helm upgrades the hell out of all releases 😃. But from the word sync, you'd expect the command to apply those releases that have been changed. There is also mention of the potential application of helmfile apply to periodically syncing of releases. Why not use helmfile sync for this purpose? Overall, the difference didn't become crystal clear, and I though there could probably be more to it. So, I'm asking.

helmfile is something i’ve used in the past for this https://github.com/roboll/helmfile

I always felt like dependencies in helm are for very simple non-coupled packages. I many times use Helmfile (https://github.com/roboll/helmfile) to manage dependencies instead of banging my head with vanilla Helm.

Once you do that, learn to create dynamic helm charts that use go templating and conditionals: https://github.com/roboll/helmfile