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
However, the above config is not working for subsequent deployments. We have the same error as we have when trying to deploy the stack for the first time with resourceConcurrency set.
The CloudFormation template is invalid: Circular dependency between resources: [UpdateEmailTemplateNestedStack, CustomMessageNestedStack, SetDefaultEmailTemplateNestedStack, UpdateGroupNestedStack, ...].
It looks like resourceConcurrency creates some circular dependencies between resources and stackConcurrency does the same but between nested stacks (if that makes sense?).
Is there any way to handle this issue? Currently, we removed both options and left only:
We have the same issue as described in #122 and #188. The latest issue has been closed. That's why I decided to create a new issue.
If we have
resourceConcurrency
in our config, it does not allow us to deploy the stack for the first time (completely new deployment from scratch).On the other hand,
stackConcurrency
works for the first deployment but does not work for subsequent ones.To better show these issues, please take a look at the cases below.
The config below is not working if we want to deploy the stack for the first time:
We have this error:
Removing
resourceConcurrency
from the config above makes deploying the stack for the first time possible.However, the above config is not working for subsequent deployments. We have the same error as we have when trying to deploy the stack for the first time with
resourceConcurrency
set.It looks like
resourceConcurrency
creates some circular dependencies between resources andstackConcurrency
does the same but between nested stacks (if that makes sense?).Is there any way to handle this issue? Currently, we removed both options and left only:
However, I am afraid that we will hit API rate limit errors in the nearest feature and the problem will arise again.
Thank you for any tips in advance! 🙏
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: