Using Count in Terraform to create Launch Configuration - amazon-web-services

Question

I have 3 different version of an AMI, for 3 different nodes in a cluster.
data "aws_ami" "node1"
{
# Use the most recent AMI that matches the pattern below in 'values'.
most_recent = true
filter {
name = "name"
values = ["AMI_node1*"]
}
filter {
name = "tag:version"
values = ["${var.node1_version}"]
}
}
data "aws_ami" "node2"
{
# Use the most recent AMI that matches the pattern below in 'values'.
most_recent = true
filter {
name = "name"
values = ["AMI_node2*"]
}
filter {
name = "tag:version"
values = ["${var.node2_version}"]
}
}
data "aws_ami" "node3"
{
...
}
I would like to create 3 different Launch Configuration and Auto Scaling Group using each of the AMIs respectively.
resource "aws_launch_configuration" "node"
{
count = "${local.node_instance_count}"
# Name-prefix must be used otherwise terraform fails to perform updates to existing launch configurations due to
# a name conflict: LCs are immutable and the LC cannot be destroyed without destroying attached ASGs as well, which
# terraform will not do. Using name-prefix lets a new LC be created and swapped into the ASG.
name_prefix = "${var.environment_name}-node${count.index + 1}-"
image_id = "${data.aws_ami.node[count.index].image_id}"
instance_type = "${var.default_ec2_instance_type}"
...
}
However, I am not able use aws_ami.node1, aws_ami.node2, aws_ami.node3 using the cound.index the way I have shown above. I get the following error:
Error reading config for aws_launch_configuration[node]: parse error at 1:39: expected "}" but found "."
Is there another way I can do this in Terraform?

Answer 1

Indexing data sources isn't something that's doable; at the moment.
You're likely better off simply dropping the data sources you've defined and codifying the image IDs into a Terraform map variable.
variable "node_image_ids" {
type = "map"
default = {
"node1" = "1234434"
"node2" = "1233334"
"node3" = "1222434"
}
}
Then, consume it:
image_id = "${lookup(var.node_image_ids, concat("node", count.index), "some_default_image_id")}"
The downside of this is that you'll need to manually update the image id when images are upgraded.