enable gp3 storage_type for aws_db_instance

[erz4]

Description

Support new RDS storage type of gp3

References

https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonRDS/latest/UserGuide/CHAP_Storage.html

Closes #27702

[github-actions]

Community Note

Voting for Prioritization

• Please vote on this pull request by adding a 👍 reaction to the original post to help the community and maintainers prioritize this pull request.
• Please see our prioritization guide for information on how we prioritize.
• Please do not leave "+1" or other comments that do not add relevant new information or questions, they generate extra noise for issue followers and do not help prioritize the request.

For Submitters

• Review the contribution guide relating to the type of change you are making to ensure all of the necessary steps have been taken.
• For new resources and data sources, use skaff to generate scaffolding with comments detailing common expectations.
• Whether or not the branch has been rebased will not impact prioritization, but doing so is always a welcome surprise.

[github-actions]

Welcome @erz4 👋

It looks like this is your first Pull Request submission to the Terraform AWS Provider! If you haven’t already done so please make sure you have checked out our CONTRIBUTOR guide and FAQ to make sure your contribution is adhering to best practice and has all the necessary elements in place for a successful approval.

Also take a look at our FAQ which details how we prioritize Pull Requests for inclusion.

Thanks again, and welcome to the community! 😃

[katdev]

This is great, but doesn't allow for the additional options configurable when using gp3, specifically provisioned_iops and storage_throughput as requested in #27702 . Can we get those added, either here or in a future PR?

[NivStav-RecoLabs]

This is great, but doesn't allow for the additional options configurable when using gp3, specifically provisioned_iops and storage_throughput as requested in #27702 . Can we get those added, either here or in a future PR?

For RDS gp3 those are preconfigured and can't be changed.
See the updated docs:
https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonRDS/latest/UserGuide/CHAP_Storage.html

[katdev]

For RDS gp3 those are preconfigured and can't be changed.
See the updated docs:
https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonRDS/latest/UserGuide/CHAP_Storage.html

The range is set, but those are very much configurable with gp3.

These should be the --iops and --storage-throughput options available via the CLI.

[NivStav-RecoLabs]

Interesting, in Postgress these are grayed out, what engine are you using?

[katdev]

It's the storage -- the options aren't available until storage is >=400GB. Note the comment To provision additional IOPS and throughput, increase the allocated storage to 400 GiB or greater.

[garyhampson]

Came here to post the same findings as @katdev regarding storage_throughput. I think that https://github.com/hashicorp/terraform-provider-aws/blob/main/internal/service/rds/instance.go would also need to be updated, particularly in the area of lines 1761-1767.

[erz4]

@katdev @NivStav-RecoLabs @garyhampson I added the storage_throughput att

[robw-ca]

The storage throughput should really default to 125, which is the free amount.

[ToonSpinISAAC]

I agree with @robw-ca that the storage throughput default should be 125 but for a different reason - it's both what the console defaults to (edit: at least for the menu choices I made in the console just now), and what the baseline is for storage under 400GB.

Is it possible without much effort to make the default throughput value vary based on the storage size? Because if so then maybe it would be even better to mimic the console further, and have it be 125 for under 400GB and 500 for 400GB and greater. My reasoning for this is that I feel like many if not most people will want to just specify storage and not tweak throughput.

Either way I will be happy to see this merged, thanks for the effort everyone. If my Go skills were good enough I would happily contribute.

[erz4]

I agree with @robw-ca that the storage throughput default should be 125 but for a different reason - it's both what the console defaults to (edit: at least for the menu choices I made in the console just now), and what the baseline is for storage under 400GB.

Is it possible without much effort to make the default throughput value vary based on the storage size? Because if so then maybe it would be even better to mimic the console further, and have it be 125 for under 400GB and 500 for 400GB and greater. My reasoning for this is that I feel like many if not most people will want to just specify storage and not tweak throughput.

Either way I will be happy to see this merged, thanks for the effort everyone. If my Go skills were good enough I would happily contribute.

As you said when the storage allocation gets to 400GB the storage throughput goes to 500 and stays like that unless the user changes it

[robw-ca]

Ah didn't see those docs, and assumed it'd stay with the default 125 as a default EBS volume would!

[ewbankkit]

LGTM 🚀.

% make testacc TESTARGS='-run=TestAccRDSInstanceDataSource_basic' PKG=rds ACCTEST_PARALLELISM=3
==> Checking that code complies with gofmt requirements...
TF_ACC=1 go test ./internal/service/rds/... -v -count 1 -parallel 3  -run=TestAccRDSInstanceDataSource_basic -timeout 180m
=== RUN   TestAccRDSInstanceDataSource_basic
=== PAUSE TestAccRDSInstanceDataSource_basic
=== CONT  TestAccRDSInstanceDataSource_basic
--- PASS: TestAccRDSInstanceDataSource_basic (565.13s)
PASS
ok  	github.com/hashicorp/terraform-provider-aws/internal/service/rds	570.413s
% make testacc TESTARGS='-run=TestAccRDSInstance_basic' PKG=rds ACCTEST_PARALLELISM=3                              
==> Checking that code complies with gofmt requirements...
TF_ACC=1 go test ./internal/service/rds/... -v -count 1 -parallel 3  -run=TestAccRDSInstance_basic -timeout 180m
=== RUN   TestAccRDSInstance_basic
=== PAUSE TestAccRDSInstance_basic
=== CONT  TestAccRDSInstance_basic
--- PASS: TestAccRDSInstance_basic (494.62s)
PASS
ok  	github.com/hashicorp/terraform-provider-aws/internal/service/rds	499.714s
% make testacc TESTARGS='-run=TestAccRDSInstance_separateIopsUpdate' PKG=rds ACCTEST_PARALLELISM=3
==> Checking that code complies with gofmt requirements...
TF_ACC=1 go test ./internal/service/rds/... -v -count 1 -parallel 3  -run=TestAccRDSInstance_separateIopsUpdate -timeout 180m
=== RUN   TestAccRDSInstance_separateIopsUpdate
=== PAUSE TestAccRDSInstance_separateIopsUpdate
=== CONT  TestAccRDSInstance_separateIopsUpdate
--- PASS: TestAccRDSInstance_separateIopsUpdate (771.03s)
PASS
ok  	github.com/hashicorp/terraform-provider-aws/internal/service/rds	775.895s
% make testacc TESTARGS='-run=TestAccRDSInstance_gp3' PKG=rds ACCTEST_PARALLELISM=3
==> Checking that code complies with gofmt requirements...
TF_ACC=1 go test ./internal/service/rds/... -v -count 1 -parallel 3  -run=TestAccRDSInstance_gp3 -timeout 180m
=== RUN   TestAccRDSInstance_gp3
=== PAUSE TestAccRDSInstance_gp3
=== CONT  TestAccRDSInstance_gp3
--- PASS: TestAccRDSInstance_gp3 (547.32s)
PASS
ok  	github.com/hashicorp/terraform-provider-aws/internal/service/rds	552.106s
% make testacc TESTARGS='-run=TestAccRDSInstance_storageThroughput' PKG=rds ACCTEST_PARALLELISM=3
==> Checking that code complies with gofmt requirements...
TF_ACC=1 go test ./internal/service/rds/... -v -count 1 -parallel 3  -run=TestAccRDSInstance_storageThroughput -timeout 180m
=== RUN   TestAccRDSInstance_storageThroughput
=== PAUSE TestAccRDSInstance_storageThroughput
=== CONT  TestAccRDSInstance_storageThroughput
--- PASS: TestAccRDSInstance_storageThroughput (698.24s)
PASS
ok  	github.com/hashicorp/terraform-provider-aws/internal/service/rds	703.129s

[ewbankkit]

@erz4 Thanks for the contribution 🎉 👏.

[github-actions]

This functionality has been released in v4.45.0 of the Terraform AWS Provider. Please see the Terraform documentation on provider versioning or reach out if you need any assistance upgrading.

For further feature requests or bug reports with this functionality, please create a new GitHub issue following the template. Thank you!

[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 issues.
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.