You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Please vote on this issue by adding a 👍 reaction to the original issue to help the community and maintainers prioritize this request
Please do not leave "+1" or "me too" comments, they generate extra noise for issue followers and do not help prioritize the request
If you are interested in working on this issue or have submitted a pull request, please leave a comment
Service Used
web
API Versions Used
2023-03-01
2023-12-01
Description
When I run a GET on an existing Function App, it provides me with a functionAppConfig property which contains the specific Function App configuration. Most of these settings are duplicated under siteConfig, however the new Flex Consumption function apps only expose the instanceMemoryMB property under this setting. This appears to be for both Read and Create/Update actions.
Is it possible to have the API generation code expose the funtionAppConfig property so we can leverage it for function app configuration? This will assist with the request in hashicorp/terraform-provider-azurerm#26043.
References
No response
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Is there an existing issue for this?
Community Note
Service Used
web
API Versions Used
2023-03-01
2023-12-01
Description
When I run a
GET
on an existing Function App, it provides me with afunctionAppConfig
property which contains the specific Function App configuration. Most of these settings are duplicated undersiteConfig
, however the new Flex Consumption function apps only expose theinstanceMemoryMB
property under this setting. This appears to be for both Read and Create/Update actions.Is it possible to have the API generation code expose the
funtionAppConfig
property so we can leverage it for function app configuration? This will assist with the request in hashicorp/terraform-provider-azurerm#26043.References
No response
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: