ebs_block_device attribute changes on aws_launch_configuration not detected during plan

[aequitas]

When changing an ebs_block_device attribute on a aws_launch_configuration Terraform will not detect the change needs to be made and the plan stays empty.

Removing the attribute is also not detected as a change.

The change will be applied if:

• a change is triggered by an argument of the launch configuration.
• an attribute is added
• a launch configuration resource is tainted

Terraform Version

0.7.7

Affected Resource(s)

• aws_launch_configuration

Terraform Configuration Files

resource "aws_launch_configuration" "server" {

    .........

    lifecycle {
        create_before_destroy = true
    }

    ebs_block_device {
        device_name = "/dev/xvdf"
        volume_type = "gp2"
        #50 -> 200
        volume_size = 200
        delete_on_termination = false
    }
}

Expected Behavior

When changing parameters of a ebs_block_device or when removing the attribute altogether Terraform should pickup this difference and put it in the plan.

Actual Behavior

Terraform does not pickup this difference, plan stays empty.

Refreshing Terraform state in-memory prior to plan...
The refreshed state will be used to calculate this plan, but
will not be persisted to local or remote state storage.

data.terraform_remote_state.infra: Refreshing state...
data.template_file.init: Refreshing state...
aws_iam_instance_profile.server: Refreshing state... (ID: server)
aws_launch_configuration.server: Refreshing state... (ID: server-201610211927381563635933fu)

No changes. Infrastructure is up-to-date. This means that Terraform
could not detect any differences between your configuration and
the real physical resources that exist. As a result, Terraform
doesn't need to do anything.

Steps to Reproduce

1. create launch configuration with ebs_block_device attribute
2. plan & apply
3. change parameters of ebs_block_device attribute
4. plan

[mindw]

See #1445?

[aequitas]

@mindw thanks, total case of rtfm.

[ghost]

I'm going to lock this issue because it has been closed for 30 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active issues.

If you have found a problem that seems similar to this, please open a new issue and complete the issue template so we can capture all the details necessary to investigate further.