feat(rds): instance engine lifecycle support #34719

phuhung273 · 2025-06-14T05:00:02Z

Issue # (if applicable)

Closes #34492

Reason for this change

Cluster has this param but Instance doesn't

Description of changes

Instance engine lifecycle support
Move enum EngineLifecycleSupport to props as it is shared across cluster and instance

Describe any new or updated permissions being added

Description of how you validated changes

Unit + Integ

Checklist

My code adheres to the CONTRIBUTING GUIDE and DESIGN GUIDELINES

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache-2.0 license

go-to-k

Thanks for the PR. There are almost no problems, but I left a few very minor comments.

go-to-k · 2025-06-16T10:28:32Z

...aws-cdk-testing/framework-integ/test/aws-rds/test/integ.instance-engine-lifecycle-support.ts

+
+// For simplicity, get a public snapshot
+new rds.DatabaseInstanceFromSnapshot(stack, 'FromSnapshot', {
+  snapshotIdentifier: 'arn:aws:rds:us-east-1:484907511898:snapshot:vuln-test-db-snapshot-prod',


Is this account ID not AWS official's but yours? In my opinion, tests shouldn't depend on your or someone's account with hard coding.

I know that the way has already used in integ.instance-from-cluster-snapshot.ts, but there is a possibility that the account or the snapshot will be deleted, then developers who run this test will be confused. (Furthermore, although an AWS account ID is not confidential information, it would be good not to disclosed carelessly.)

How about using environment variables or any variables (such as process.env.CDK_INTEG_ACCOUNT || process.env.CDK_DEFAULT_ACCOUNT, stack.account, etc.)?
And it would be better to write a comment to need to create the resource and the snapshot manually before running the test. (Alternatively, we may also create them in preDeploy of hooks in IntegTest and delete them in postDestroy, but it may take a long time and be difficult.)

Or, we could create a custom resource and create a snapshot of sourceInstance within it and return that. But it might be a flaky test so it might be good the first choice.

What do you think?

*Even if this approach is continued, it would be good to add some comments about what this ID refers to and how developers should handle it (whether it is okay to use as is).

Thanks for your review. To explain, I don't even know whose snapshot is that. We can find that in RDS console > Snapshot > Public and grab which ever compatible with our setting.

I was doing the same for integ.instance-from-cluster-snapshot.ts, and now that snapshot has been deleted. Agree that this should be improved for future reader.

Also really appreciate your sharing on preDeploy and hooks, will definitely try it out for simpler test.

Detail comment on how to get the snapshot ID added.

Thanks for the change. Confirmed it.

/* * For simplicity, this integration test uses a public snapshot. * By the time you rerun, the snapshot might already be deleted. * * How to get another compatible public snapshot: * * aws rds describe-db-snapshots --include-public --snapshot-type public --query "DBSnapshots[?Engine=='mysql' && EngineVersion=='8.0.40']" --output table * * Or find one in AWS Console > RDS > Snapshots > Public */

However, as far as I can see, there are currently only four snapshots of the relevant engine in public. Furthermore, it is unclear who left them there and for what purpose. In other words, there is a possibility that there will be none when executing this integ in future.

In addition, if the snapshot referenced in the test is deleted and a new snapshot ID is specified, the instance will be replaced with the new one. Then it will cause a destructive change in the integ test. Also, if the original snapshot does not exist, an error will occur when creating a stack with the existing snapshot, causing the test to fail unless you specify --disable-update-workflow or stackUpdateWorkflow: false. Anyway, Tests should be as stable as possible.

https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSCloudFormation/latest/TemplateReference/aws-resource-rds-dbinstance.html#cfn-rds-dbinstance-dbsnapshotidentifier

If you specify a property that is different from the previous snapshot restore property, a new DB instance is restored from the specified DBSnapshotIdentifier property, and the original DB instance is deleted.

Therefore, I prefer the following approaches. How about trying different approaches?

How about using environment variables or any variables (such as process.env.CDK_INTEG_ACCOUNT || process.env.CDK_DEFAULT_ACCOUNT, stack.account, etc.)?
And it would be better to write a comment to need to create the resource and the snapshot manually before running the test. (Alternatively, we may also create them in preDeploy of hooks in IntegTest and delete them in postDestroy, but it may take a long time and be difficult.)

Or, we could create a custom resource and create a snapshot of sourceInstance within it and return that. But it might be a flaky test so it might be good the first choice.

Found an existing implementation of another integ, so I made it general for any later work requiring snapshot.

Also tried to do the same for integ.instance-from-cluster-snapshot, but the problem is DB instance can only be restored from a MultiAZ DB cluster - which is currently not yet supported by L2 construct as L2 DBCluster only support Aurora. It is still possible with L1 and some modifications on the Snapshoter. Please let me know if you want me to do so.

I see. Then, let's revert the current change in packages/@aws-cdk-testing/framework-integ/test/aws-rds/test/integ.instance-from-cluster-snapshot.ts. That change could be considered separately from this PR.

Yeah sure thanks for understanding, integ.instance-from-cluster-snapshot reverted

go-to-k · 2025-06-16T11:29:20Z

packages/aws-cdk-lib/aws-rds/lib/instance.ts

+   *
+   * @default undefined - AWS RDS default setting is `EngineLifecycleSupport.OPEN_SOURCE_RDS_EXTENDED_SUPPORT`
+   */
+  readonly engineLifecycleSupport?: EngineLifecycleSupport;


This setting applies only to RDS for MySQL and RDS for PostgreSQL.

It would be good to write it in description or validate it if possible.

https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSCloudFormation/latest/TemplateReference/aws-resource-rds-dbinstance.html#cfn-rds-dbinstance-enginelifecyclesupport

Thank you for this, engine validation added.

packages/aws-cdk-lib/aws-rds/README.md

Co-authored-by: Kenta Goto (k.goto) <[email protected]>

go-to-k · 2025-06-17T05:20:07Z

packages/aws-cdk-lib/aws-rds/lib/instance.ts

@@ -1079,6 +1090,11 @@ abstract class DatabaseInstanceSource extends DatabaseInstanceNew implements IDa
    this.engine = props.engine;

    const engineType = props.engine.engineType;
+
+    if (props.engineLifecycleSupport && !['mysql', 'postgres'].includes(engineType)) {
+      throw new ValidationError(`Engine '${engineType}' does not support engine lifecycle support`, this);


This would be more helpful.

Suggested change

throw new ValidationError(`Engine '${engineType}' does not support engine lifecycle support`, this);

throw new ValidationError(`'engineLifecycleSupport' can only be specified for RDS for MySQL and RDS for PostgreSQL, got: '${engineType}'`, this);

Thanks this is updated

go-to-k · 2025-06-17T05:20:29Z

packages/aws-cdk-lib/aws-rds/lib/instance.ts

@@ -1492,6 +1508,10 @@ export class DatabaseInstanceReadReplica extends DatabaseInstanceNew implements
      throw new ValidationError(`Cannot set 'backupRetention', as engine '${engineDescription(props.sourceDatabaseInstance.engine)}' does not support automatic backups for read replicas`, this);
    }

+    if (props.sourceDatabaseInstance.engine?.engineType && props.engineLifecycleSupport && !['mysql', 'postgres'].includes(props.sourceDatabaseInstance.engine.engineType)) {
+      throw new ValidationError(`Engine '${props.sourceDatabaseInstance.engine.engineType}' does not support engine lifecycle support`, this);


Same as above

Thanks this is updated

go-to-k · 2025-06-19T08:55:40Z

packages/aws-cdk-lib/aws-rds/lib/instance.ts

+    const engineType = props.sourceDatabaseInstance.engine?.engineType;
+    if (engineType && props.engineLifecycleSupport && !['mysql', 'postgres'].includes(engineType)) {
+      throw new ValidationError(`'engineLifecycleSupport' can only be specified for RDS for MySQL and RDS for PostgreSQL, got: '${engineType}'`, this);
+    }
+


Could you please change the following together?

const instance = new CfnDBInstance(this, 'Resource', { // ... // ... - engine: shouldPassEngine ? props.sourceDatabaseInstance.engine?.engineType : undefined, + engine: shouldPassEngine ? engineType : undefined, // ... // ...

Sure this is updated

go-to-k · 2025-06-19T09:35:56Z

...aws-cdk-testing/framework-integ/test/aws-rds/test/integ.instance-engine-lifecycle-support.ts

+
+// For simplicity, get a public snapshot
+new rds.DatabaseInstanceFromSnapshot(stack, 'FromSnapshot', {
+  snapshotIdentifier: 'arn:aws:rds:us-east-1:484907511898:snapshot:vuln-test-db-snapshot-prod',


I see. Then, let's revert the current change in packages/@aws-cdk-testing/framework-integ/test/aws-rds/test/integ.instance-from-cluster-snapshot.ts. That change could be considered separately from this PR.

aws-cdk-automation · 2025-06-19T11:29:48Z

AWS CodeBuild CI Report

CodeBuild project: AutoBuildv2Project1C6BFA3F-wQm2hXv2jqQv
Commit ID: 9bf5663
Result: SUCCEEDED
Build Logs (available for 30 days)

Powered by github-codebuild-logs, available on the AWS Serverless Application Repository

go-to-k

Thanks. Approved!

phuhung273 · 2025-06-19T11:49:28Z

Thanks for your review @go-to-k 💯

feat(rds): instance engine lifecycle support

e7a9f1e

aws-cdk-automation requested a review from a team June 14, 2025 05:00

github-actions bot added star-contributor [Pilot] contributed between 25-49 PRs to the CDK effort/medium Medium work item – several days of effort feature-request A feature should be added or improved. p2 labels Jun 14, 2025

aws-cdk-automation added the pr/needs-community-review This PR needs a review from a Trusted Community Member or Core Team Member. label Jun 14, 2025

go-to-k suggested changes Jun 16, 2025

View reviewed changes

aws-cdk-automation removed the pr/needs-community-review This PR needs a review from a Trusted Community Member or Core Team Member. label Jun 16, 2025

phuhung273 and others added 2 commits June 16, 2025 06:32

Update packages/aws-cdk-lib/aws-rds/README.md

75c3879

Co-authored-by: Kenta Goto (k.goto) <[email protected]>

add validation, improve integ comment

3b3361f

go-to-k suggested changes Jun 17, 2025

View reviewed changes

improve integ, validation message

6059f78

phuhung273 requested a review from go-to-k June 17, 2025 16:25

phuhung273 added 2 commits June 17, 2025 16:50

Merge branch 'main' into rds-instance-enginelifecycle

1a74a29

snapshot

bf99bd1

go-to-k reviewed Jun 19, 2025

View reviewed changes

revert integ.instance-from-cluster-snapshot, shorten var

9bf5663

go-to-k approved these changes Jun 19, 2025

View reviewed changes

aws-cdk-automation added the pr/needs-maintainer-review This PR needs a review from a Core Team Member label Jun 19, 2025

	throw new ValidationError(`Engine '${engineType}' does not support engine lifecycle support`, this);
	throw new ValidationError(`'engineLifecycleSupport' can only be specified for RDS for MySQL and RDS for PostgreSQL, got: '${engineType}'`, this);

feat(rds): instance engine lifecycle support #34719

Are you sure you want to change the base?

feat(rds): instance engine lifecycle support #34719

Uh oh!

Conversation

phuhung273 commented Jun 14, 2025

Issue # (if applicable)

Reason for this change

Description of changes

Describe any new or updated permissions being added

Description of how you validated changes

Checklist

Uh oh!

go-to-k left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

phuhung273 Jun 16, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

go-to-k Jun 17, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

go-to-k Jun 19, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

phuhung273 Jun 19, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

go-to-k Jun 19, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

aws-cdk-automation commented Jun 19, 2025

AWS CodeBuild CI Report

Uh oh!

go-to-k left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

phuhung273 commented Jun 19, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

phuhung273 Jun 16, 2025 •

edited

Loading

go-to-k Jun 17, 2025 •

edited

Loading

go-to-k Jun 19, 2025 •

edited

Loading

phuhung273 Jun 19, 2025 •

edited

Loading

go-to-k Jun 19, 2025 •

edited

Loading

go-to-k left a comment •

edited

Loading