Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Lack of default value serialization causes certain requests to fail #2162

Closed
lucix-aws opened this issue Jun 27, 2023 · 9 comments
Closed

Lack of default value serialization causes certain requests to fail #2162

lucix-aws opened this issue Jun 27, 2023 · 9 comments
Labels
bug This issue is a bug. p2 This is a standard priority issue service-api This issue is due to a problem in a service API, not the SDK implementation.

Comments

@lucix-aws
Copy link
Contributor

lucix-aws commented Jun 27, 2023

Describe the bug

In the AWS SDK for Go v2, "optional" fields in an operation request are exposed as nilable (pointer e.g. *bool) types. When left as their nil zero value, these fields will not be serialized in an outgoing request.

Additionally, specific fields may be marked as having a "default" in their smithy model. For these fields, we instead generate them as scalar types (e.g. bool). We then omit serialization of these values if they are set as the zero value in the input (whether they were done so explicitly or otherwise, as we do not implement "presence tracking" of set values in the Go v2 SDK).

Certain operations, however, will fail on validation if the input is configured in such a way that certain values are set as defaults and end up not being serialized. This can be confusing to the SDK user, who from their perspective, may be explicitly setting values in a request, only to have the service reject with the complaint that their submitted config is incomplete.

The following operations have been observed to behave incorrectly in this manner, though this list is certainly nowhere near exhaustive:

  • S3::PutPublicAccessBlock: main input's PublicAccessBlockConfiguration field
  • S3Control::PutPublicAccessBlock: main input's PublicAccessBlockConfiguration field
  • S3::SelectObjectContent: main input's ScanRange field
  • MediaConvert::CreateJob in general (this operation's input is large and likely has several trigger points for this issue)
  • We were notified of a customer issue for this same reason within the Lambda service, but didn't receive follow-up to identify the operation(s) at fault.
  • APIGateway operations have had this issue in the past, but have reportedly been fixed in the model.
  • There have historically been issues with the EC2 service in this regard as well. We have applied a customization to make every field in every input nilable because of this.
  • SQS::ChangeMessageVisibilityBatch: input.Entries[].VisibilityTimeout (reported in sqs.ChangeMessageVisibilityBatch fails when entries' VisibilityTimeout is zero #2250)
  • IVS::UpdateChannel: TranscodePreset (reported in SDK UpdateChannel Call Fails to Update IVS Channel Type #2262)

Expected Behavior

n/a

Current Behavior

n/a

Reproduction Steps

This is one example for PutPublicAccessBlock:

package main

import (
    "context"
    "log"
    "github.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/aws"
    "github.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/config"
    "github.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/s3control"
    "github.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/s3control/types"
)

func main() {
    cfg, err := config.LoadDefaultConfig(context.Background(),
        config.WithRegion("us-east-1"),
        config.WithClientLogMode(aws.LogRequest|aws.LogRequestWithBody|aws.LogResponse))
    if err != nil {
        log.Fatal(err)
    }

    s3 := s3control.NewFromConfig(cfg)

    _, err = s3.PutPublicAccessBlock(context.Background(), &s3control.PutPublicAccessBlockInput{
        AccountId:                      aws.String("..."),
        PublicAccessBlockConfiguration: &types.PublicAccessBlockConfiguration{BlockPublicAcls: false},
    })
    if err != nil {
        log.Fatal(err)
    }
}

This snippet, when run, will produce an error:

operation error S3 Control: PutPublicAccessBlock, https response error StatusCode: 400, RequestID: ..., HostID: ..., api error InvalidRequest: Must specify at least one configuration.

Because the request serialized PublicAccessBlockConfiguration as an empty container (rather than explicitly setting BlockPublicAcls to false within).

Possible Solution

There are several ways forward here, listed in order of increasing impact radius:

  • Patch the problematic fields on a per-op basis
  • Abandon the notion of default values for affected services and instead generate every input field as nilable
  • Option 2, but for every service

All of these options would constitute a break-fix.

Note that simply switching to serialize default values is not an option, as this is liable to break operations whose default value behavior is the inverse of the operations recorded here.

Additional Information/Context

No response

AWS Go SDK V2 Module Versions Used

latest

Compiler and Version used

n/a

Operating System and version

n/a

@lucix-aws lucix-aws added bug This issue is a bug. needs-triage This issue or PR still needs to be triaged. labels Jun 27, 2023
@lucix-aws lucix-aws added p1 This is a high priority issue and removed needs-triage This issue or PR still needs to be triaged. labels Jun 27, 2023
@object-Object
Copy link

This also occurs with lifecycle rules containing AbortIncompleteMultipartUpload.

Go reproduction steps:

package main

import (
	"context"
	"log"

	"github.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/aws"
	"github.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/config"
	"github.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/s3"
	"github.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/s3/types"
)

func main() {
	bucketName := "..."

	ctx := context.Background()
	cfg, err := config.LoadDefaultConfig(ctx)
	if err != nil {
		log.Fatal(err)
	}

	client := s3.NewFromConfig(cfg)

	_, err = client.PutBucketLifecycleConfiguration(ctx, &s3.PutBucketLifecycleConfigurationInput{
		Bucket: &bucketName,
		LifecycleConfiguration: &types.BucketLifecycleConfiguration{
			Rules: []types.LifecycleRule{
				{
					ID:     aws.String("rule"),
					Status: types.ExpirationStatusEnabled,
					Filter: &types.LifecycleRuleFilterMemberPrefix{
						Value: "prefix",
					},
					AbortIncompleteMultipartUpload: &types.AbortIncompleteMultipartUpload{
						DaysAfterInitiation: 1,
					},
					Expiration: &types.LifecycleExpiration{ // problem occurs here
						ExpiredObjectDeleteMarker: false,
					},
				},
			},
		},
	})
	if err != nil {
		log.Fatal(err)
	}
}

This is an issue when deserializing lifecycle rules created through the console (or likely other SDKs which don't have Go's zero value semantics). When created through the console, this type of rule returns the following XML, corresponding to the above Go code.

<LifecycleConfiguration xmlns="http://s3.amazonaws.com/doc/2006-03-01/">
    <Rule>
        <ID>pass</ID>
        <Filter>
            <Prefix>prefix</Prefix>
        </Filter>
        <Status>Enabled</Status>
        <AbortIncompleteMultipartUpload>
            <DaysAfterInitiation>4</DaysAfterInitiation>
        </AbortIncompleteMultipartUpload>
        <Expiration>
            <ExpiredObjectDeleteMarker>false</ExpiredObjectDeleteMarker>
        </Expiration>
    </Rule>
</LifecycleConfiguration>

The following XML is what's sent by the Go code, which returns a MalformedXML error.

<LifecycleConfiguration xmlns="http://s3.amazonaws.com/doc/2006-03-01">
    <Rule>
        <ID>pass</ID>
        <Filter>
            <Prefix>prefix</Prefix>
        </Filter>
        <Status>Enabled</Status>
        <AbortIncompleteMultipartUpload>
            <DaysAfterInitiation>4</DaysAfterInitiation>
        </AbortIncompleteMultipartUpload>
        <Expiration></Expiration>
    </Rule>
</LifecycleConfiguration>

This means (as with aws/aws-sdk#582) that getting the lifecycle rules from a bucket then putting those same rules to the bucket, which should logically be a no-op, returns an error. Our use case is dynamically appending lifecycle rules to a bucket while preserving existing rules.

Workaround, for others running into this issue:

for i, rule := range response.Rules {
	if rule.Expiration != nil && rule.Expiration.Date == nil && rule.Expiration.Days == 0 && !rule.Expiration.ExpiredObjectDeleteMarker {
		response.Rules[i].Expiration = nil
	}
}

@RanVaknin
Copy link
Contributor

related aws/aws-sdk#577

ewbankkit added a commit to hashicorp/terraform-provider-aws that referenced this issue Sep 27, 2023
…ion_configuration` and `aws_s3_bucket_lifecycle_configuration`

awaiting the resolution of aws/aws-sdk-go-v2#2162.
This was done via `git revert --no-commit 4850ad9..50100db`.
Restoring this work should be done by `git revert` on this commit.
@lucix-aws lucix-aws added service-api This issue is due to a problem in a service API, not the SDK implementation. p2 This is a standard priority issue and removed p1 This is a high priority issue labels Oct 4, 2023
@lucix-aws
Copy link
Contributor Author

Yesterday's release addressed a significant number of these. A followup to address S3 specifically is forthcoming.

@lucix-aws
Copy link
Contributor Author

Today's release included another round of fixes to various services, including S3: https://github.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/releases/tag/release-2023-11-17

@wolfeidau
Copy link

Wow this change caught me off guard when starting a new project, by breaking another library I used in some interesting ways.

  1. I added github.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/s3
  2. I added github.com/wolfeidau/s3iofs which uses an older version of v2 s3.
  3. Pretty confusing compile error...
# github.com/wolfeidau/s3iofs
../../../go/pkg/mod/github.com/wolfeidau/s3iofs@v1.3.1/s3iofs.go:82:13: cannot use res.ContentLength (variable of type *int64) as int64 value in struct literal
../../../go/pkg/mod/github.com/wolfeidau/s3iofs@v1.3.1/s3iofs.go:150:13: cannot use obj.Size (variable of type *int64) as int64 value in struct literal
../../../go/pkg/mod/github.com/wolfeidau/s3iofs@v1.3.1/s3iofs.go:172:14: cannot use 1 (untyped int constant) as *int32 value in struct literal
../../../go/pkg/mod/github.com/wolfeidau/s3iofs@v1.3.1/s3iofs.go:193:13: cannot use list.Contents[0].Size (variable of type *int64) as int64 value in struct literal
make: *** [build] Error 1

Not sure if i was the only one to run into this.

@at-wat
Copy link

at-wat commented Nov 20, 2023

I believe API breaking changes should be released with a new major version.

I also have a library importing aws-sdk-go-v2 and have compatibility issue due to this.

@lucix-aws
Copy link
Contributor Author

See my comments on #2370 (comment). This issue is another supporting data point for getting a proper major versioning strategy in place.

@lucix-aws
Copy link
Contributor Author

Through the efforts of the smithy team we've now fixed default value issues of this nature across 100 services (including s3).

I'm going to close this since we've addressed the problem at large. Problems with this behavior in the future should be addressed through individual issues.

Copy link

⚠️COMMENT VISIBILITY WARNING⚠️

Comments on closed issues are hard for our team to see.
If you need more assistance, please either tag a team member or open a new issue that references this one.
If you wish to keep having a conversation with other community members under this issue feel free to do so.

serprex added a commit to PeerDB-io/peerdb that referenced this issue Nov 20, 2023
Also: combine COPY/RUN commands in dockerfiles where applicable. Reduces size of images by reducing layers

Hold back gosnowflake/aws-sdk-go, gosnowflake changed default PUT to ovewrite=false in 1.7.0 & aws-sdk-go has breaking changes in aws-sdk-go 1.48
https://docs.snowflake.com/en/release-notes/clients-drivers/golang-2023

snowflakedb/gosnowflake#971
aws/aws-sdk-go-v2#2162
hanazuki added a commit to hanazuki/s3tftpd that referenced this issue Dec 20, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug This issue is a bug. p2 This is a standard priority issue service-api This issue is due to a problem in a service API, not the SDK implementation.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants