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

Added support for Databricks Apps in DABs #1928

Open
wants to merge 26 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Conversation

andrewnester
Copy link
Contributor

@andrewnester andrewnester commented Nov 21, 2024

Changes

Now it's possible to configure new app resource in bundle and point it to the custom source_code_path location where Databricks App code is defined.

On databricks bundle deploy DABs will create an app. All consecutive databricks bundle deploy execution will update an existing app if there are any updated

On databricks bundle run <my_app> DABs will execute app deployment. If the app is not started yet, it will start the app first.

Bundle configuration

bundle:
  name: apps

variables:
  my_job_id:
    description: "ID of job to run app"
    lookup:
      job: "My Job"
  databricks_name:
    description: "Name for app user"
  additional_flags:
    description: "Additional flags to run command app"
    default: ""
  my_app_config:
    type: complex
    description: "Configuration for my Databricks App"
    default:
      command:
        - flask
        - --app
        - hello
        - run
        - ${var.additional_flags}
      env:
        - name: DATABRICKS_NAME
          value: ${var.databricks_name}

resources:
  apps:
    my_app:
      name: "anester-app" # required and has to be unique
      description: "My App"
      source_code_path: ./app # required and points to location of app code
      config: ${var.my_app_config}
      resources:
        - name: "my-job"
          description: "A job for app to be able to run"
          job:
            id: ${var.my_job_id}
            permission: "CAN_MANAGE_RUN"
      permissions:
        - user_name: "[email protected]"
          level: "CAN_VIEW"
        - service_principal_name: "my_sp"
          level: "CAN_MANAGE"

targets:
  dev:
    variables:
      databricks_name: "Andrew (from dev)"
      additional_flags: --debug
  
  prod:
    variables:
      databricks_name: "Andrew (from prod)"

Execution

  1. databricks bundle deploy -t dev
  2. databricks bundle run my_app -t dev

If app is started

✓ Getting the status of the app my-app
✓ App is in RUNNING state
✓ Preparing source code for new app deployment.
✓ Deployment is pending
✓ Starting app with command: flask --app hello run --debug
✓ App started successfully
You can access the app at <app-url>

If app is not started

✓ Getting the status of the app my-app
✓ App is in UNAVAILABLE state
✓ Starting the app my-app
✓ App is starting...
....
✓ App is starting...
✓ App is started!
✓ Preparing source code for new app deployment.
✓ Downloading source code from /Workspace/Users/...
✓ Starting app with command: flask --app hello run --debug
✓ App started successfully
You can access the app at <app-url>

Tests

Added unit and config tests + manual test.

--- PASS: TestAccDeployBundleWithApp (404.59s)
PASS
coverage: 36.8% of statements in ./...
ok      github.com/databricks/cli/internal/bundle       405.035s        coverage: 36.8% of statements in ./...

## Changes
Added support for bundle generate and bind for Apps

## Tests
- [ ] Add E2E test
@eng-dev-ecosystem-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

Test Details: go/deco-tests/12394072048

bundle/apps/upload_config.go Show resolved Hide resolved
bundle/apps/upload_config.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
bundle/apps/upload_config.go Show resolved Hide resolved
diags := bundle.Apply(context.Background(), b, InterpolateVariables())
require.Empty(t, diags)
require.Equal(t, []any([]any{map[string]any{"name": "JOB_ID", "value": "123"}}), b.Config.Resources.Apps["my_app_1"].Config["env"])
require.Nil(t, b.Config.Resources.Apps["my_app_2"].Config)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This test works but doesn't actually use the translation map.

I suspect you intend to make sure that the conversion of bundle-internal field references to Terraform resource field references is undone so that we can interpolate the IDs ourselves. But the test runs against a bundle-internal field reference.

Is there an alternative approach such that we don't have to convert back-and-forth? Maybe we completely skip this path during variable resolution? Or only skip resources.* references under resources.apps.*.config.**? Then we have less coupling with the TF resource interpolation.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I prefer to keep conversion to TF for all resources and then having this separate mutator which converts it back. The reasons are:

  1. We will still need to keep InterpolateVariables mutator in both cases (with or without the conversion)
  2. If we decide to add more fields to be processed this way we will need to add 2 changes in 2 places: a conditional skip in TF mutator, and the processing of the field in InterpolateVariables mutator. Without the skip we just need to add the change in 1 place (InterpolateVariables)

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That works for me.

The test now uses the TF notation, so it will fail when that is changed.

bundle/apps/upload_config.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
bundle/apps/upload_config.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
bundle/apps/upload_config.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
bundle/apps/validate.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
bundle/apps/validate.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
bundle/config/resources/apps.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
bundle/deploy/terraform/util.go Show resolved Hide resolved
bundle/internal/schema/annotations.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
integration/bundle/apps_test.go Show resolved Hide resolved
bundle/apps/interpolate_variables.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
diags := bundle.Apply(context.Background(), b, InterpolateVariables())
require.Empty(t, diags)
require.Equal(t, []any([]any{map[string]any{"name": "JOB_ID", "value": "123"}}), b.Config.Resources.Apps["my_app_1"].Config["env"])
require.Nil(t, b.Config.Resources.Apps["my_app_2"].Config)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That works for me.

The test now uses the TF notation, so it will fail when that is changed.

// It means we need to write app.yml file with the content of the config field
// to the remote source code path of the app.
if app.Config != nil {
appPath := strings.TrimPrefix(app.SourceCodePath, b.Config.Workspace.FilePath)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@fjakobs @ilyakuz-db FYI, this is a potential problem for source-linked deployments. We assume here that files are deployed under ${workspace.file_path} and then write a file into it. If we were to make this work for source-linked deployments, this would have to write a file to the source folder itself, which in turn means we'll get validation errors (we check that the user does not have both an app.yml and a configuration section in the bundle configuration for their app.

The fact that we have to think about this (and potentially work around it) illustrates the problem that this duality brings.

bundle/apps/upload_config.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
bundle/apps/upload_config_test.go Show resolved Hide resolved
bundle/apps/validate.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
bundle/apps/validate.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
bundle/config/mutator/run_as_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
bundle/deploy/terraform/util.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link

If integration tests don't run automatically, an authorized user can run them manually by following the instructions below:

Trigger:
go/deco-tests-run/cli

Inputs:

  • PR number: 1928
  • Commit SHA: 7693f0add0ab88bd49c109047cedc75cc16edd42

Checks will be approved automatically on success.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants