Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
acceptance: fix vector_search_endpoint permissions config to use existing principal - #5151
Merged
Merged
Conversation
…ting principal The invariant test config used "user_name: viewer@example.com", which doesn't exist in the cloud workspaces. The Permissions Set API silently drops the unknown user, so a Read after deploy returns an ACL without that entry — the no_drift invariant then sees a phantom update and the test fails on aws-prod-ucws. Use "group_name: users" (the always-present users group) to match the pattern in every other *_with_permissions invariant config (jobs, models, secret scopes). Verified that the no_drift variant now passes on aws-prod-ucws. Co-authored-by: Isaac
shreyas-goenkatemporarily deployed
to
test-trigger-is
May 1, 2026 10:24 — with 
GitHub Actions
Inactive
shreyas-goenkatemporarily deployed
to
test-trigger-is
May 1, 2026 10:24 — with GitHub Actions
Inactive
shreyas-goenka
marked this pull request as ready for review
May 1, 2026 10:44
janniklasrose
approved these changes
May 1, 2026
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
denik pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 20, 2026
…ting principal (#5151) ## Summary The invariant test config used \`user_name: viewer@example.com\`, which doesn't exist in the cloud workspaces. The Permissions Set API silently drops the unknown user, so a Read after deploy returns an ACL without that entry — the no_drift invariant then sees a phantom update and the test fails on aws-prod-ucws. Pre-existing bug from #4887, not caught earlier because deploy itself was failing on the 50-char endpoint name limit (#5108) before reaching the no_drift check. ### Failure shape (before this fix) \`\`\` "resources.vector_search_endpoints.bar.permissions": { "action": "update", "new_state": { "value": { "__embed__": [ { "level": "CAN_USE", "user_name": "viewer@example.com" }, { "level": "CAN_MANAGE", "service_principal_name": "[USERNAME]" } ] } }, "remote_state": { "__embed__": [ { "level": "CAN_MANAGE", "service_principal_name": "[USERNAME]" } ] }, ... } \`\`\` ### Change Use \`group_name: users\` (always present in every workspace) to match the pattern used by the other \`*_with_permissions\` invariant configs (\`job_with_permissions\`, \`model_with_permissions\`, \`secret_scope_with_permissions\`). ## Test plan - [x] Local: \`go test ./acceptance -run 'TestAccept/bundle/invariant/no_drift/DATABRICKS_BUNDLE_ENGINE=direct/INPUT_CONFIG=vector_search_endpoint'\` passes - [x] Cloud: same target passes on aws-prod-ucws This pull request was AI-assisted by Isaac.
TanishqDatabricks pushed a commit
to TanishqDatabricks/cli
that referenced
this pull request
May 22, 2026
…ting principal (databricks#5151) ## Summary The invariant test config used \`user_name: viewer@example.com\`, which doesn't exist in the cloud workspaces. The Permissions Set API silently drops the unknown user, so a Read after deploy returns an ACL without that entry — the no_drift invariant then sees a phantom update and the test fails on aws-prod-ucws. Pre-existing bug from databricks#4887, not caught earlier because deploy itself was failing on the 50-char endpoint name limit (databricks#5108) before reaching the no_drift check. ### Failure shape (before this fix) \`\`\` "resources.vector_search_endpoints.bar.permissions": { "action": "update", "new_state": { "value": { "__embed__": [ { "level": "CAN_USE", "user_name": "viewer@example.com" }, { "level": "CAN_MANAGE", "service_principal_name": "[USERNAME]" } ] } }, "remote_state": { "__embed__": [ { "level": "CAN_MANAGE", "service_principal_name": "[USERNAME]" } ] }, ... } \`\`\` ### Change Use \`group_name: users\` (always present in every workspace) to match the pattern used by the other \`*_with_permissions\` invariant configs (\`job_with_permissions\`, \`model_with_permissions\`, \`secret_scope_with_permissions\`). ## Test plan - [x] Local: \`go test ./acceptance -run 'TestAccept/bundle/invariant/no_drift/DATABRICKS_BUNDLE_ENGINE=direct/INPUT_CONFIG=vector_search_endpoint'\` passes - [x] Cloud: same target passes on aws-prod-ucws This pull request was AI-assisted by Isaac.
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 freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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.
Summary
The invariant test config used `user_name: viewer@example.com`, which doesn't exist in the cloud workspaces. The Permissions Set API silently drops the unknown user, so a Read after deploy returns an ACL without that entry — the no_drift invariant then sees a phantom update and the test fails on aws-prod-ucws.
Pre-existing bug from #4887, not caught earlier because deploy itself was failing on the 50-char endpoint name limit (#5108) before reaching the no_drift check.
Failure shape (before this fix)
```
"resources.vector_search_endpoints.bar.permissions": {
"action": "update",
"new_state": {
"value": {
"embed": [
{ "level": "CAN_USE", "user_name": "viewer@example.com" },
{ "level": "CAN_MANAGE", "service_principal_name": "[USERNAME]" }
]
}
},
"remote_state": {
"embed": [
{ "level": "CAN_MANAGE", "service_principal_name": "[USERNAME]" }
]
},
...
}
```
Change
Use `group_name: users` (always present in every workspace) to match the pattern used by the other `*_with_permissions` invariant configs (`job_with_permissions`, `model_with_permissions`, `secret_scope_with_permissions`).
Test plan
This pull request was AI-assisted by Isaac.