resource/aws_dynamodb_table: (actually) fix disabling stream

[radeksimko]

#3197 didn't actually address the issue because I overlooked a test which was generating new table name between steps and causing it to be recreated - hence never updating the table. 🙈

Test results

=== RUN   TestAccAWSDynamoDbTable_streamSpecificationValidation
--- PASS: TestAccAWSDynamoDbTable_streamSpecificationValidation (2.64s)
=== RUN   TestAccAWSDynamoDbTable_streamSpecification
--- PASS: TestAccAWSDynamoDbTable_streamSpecification (40.34s)
=== RUN   TestAccAWSDynamoDbTable_importTags
--- PASS: TestAccAWSDynamoDbTable_importTags (51.92s)
=== RUN   TestAccAWSDynamoDbTable_importTimeToLive
--- PASS: TestAccAWSDynamoDbTable_importTimeToLive (52.31s)
=== RUN   TestAccAWSDynamoDbTable_tags
--- PASS: TestAccAWSDynamoDbTable_tags (107.27s)
=== RUN   TestAccAWSDynamoDbTable_ttl
--- PASS: TestAccAWSDynamoDbTable_ttl (143.47s)
=== RUN   TestAccAWSDynamoDbTable_gsiUpdateCapacity
--- PASS: TestAccAWSDynamoDbTable_gsiUpdateCapacity (182.99s)
=== RUN   TestAccAWSDynamoDbTable_importBasic
--- PASS: TestAccAWSDynamoDbTable_importBasic (199.82s)
=== RUN   TestAccAWSDynamoDbTable_basic
--- PASS: TestAccAWSDynamoDbTable_basic (414.13s)
=== RUN   TestAccAWSDynamoDbTable_gsiUpdateNonKeyAttributes
--- PASS: TestAccAWSDynamoDbTable_gsiUpdateNonKeyAttributes (417.06s)
=== RUN   TestAccAWSDynamoDbTable_gsiUpdateOtherAttributes
--- PASS: TestAccAWSDynamoDbTable_gsiUpdateOtherAttributes (713.90s)

[bflad]

#3197 didn't actually address the issue because I overlooked a test which was generating new table name between steps and causing it to be recreated - hence never updating the table.

You're not alone! 😄 I have submitted a proposal enhancement upstream for this, as I have definitely needed some sort of validation for this in the past! https://github.com/hashicorp/terraform/issues/17262

[bflad]

LGTM

[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 feel this issue should be reopened, we encourage creating a new issue linking back to this one for added context. Thanks!