Expands elasticache resource to handle ReplicationGroups and Serverless - #616
Draft
cmattoon wants to merge 5 commits into
Draft
Expands elasticache resource to handle ReplicationGroups and Serverless#616cmattoon wants to merge 5 commits into
cmattoon wants to merge 5 commits into
Conversation
cmattoon
marked this pull request as draft
February 12, 2026 19:42
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
While writing some tests, I noticed
elasticache('cluster-name')only found one of our instances that was configured in cluster mode, but missed the rest of the resources.I wasn't sure whether to add other resources or modify this one, but I modified the current one to meet my expectations that
elasticachewould find my ElastiCache stuff. If it makes more sense to create separate resources, I can refactor.I'm not a Ruby guy, so I had Cursor+gpt-5.2-codex help me out. I checked through the files, they look sane, and they work on my machine, but I'm not a Ruby guy, so I'm not entirely certain it's the best it can be.
I did ask it to double-check the code for safety issues and consistency with the rest of the codebase, and the main suggestion was to reduce usage of
rescue StandardErrorto avoid swallowing exceptions, but I left it as-is for consistency.