-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 150
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Is there a reason to allow max length as 90 in resource group definition name #20
Comments
Thanks for bringing this up. We are aware of this issue, but it has only come up one other time, so it is not high in our priority list for our backlog. I will pass this on to the rest of the time and see if we can squeeze it in. |
I have the same issue. I tried to use variables but got a function error. Are variables not supported?
|
What error have you encountered? Mine was due to the limitation that the PowerShell module doesn't allow (Name value is not greater than 90 chars). Note that if you use Azure Blueprint PowerShell module you need to follow the standard blueprint as code that Alex suggests. I also wrote some tips here to use with large Azure blueprint https://azsec.azurewebsites.net/2020/01/04/essential-tips-for-building-a-large-azure-blueprint/ |
Getting hit by this same issue. The errors comes because, we want to control how naming of the resource groups are generated. |
When will this be resolved ? |
There is no plan to resolve this issue. |
I look into Azure Blueprint module (ResourceGroupDefinition class) and not sure why it allows max length 90 only.
It should of allowed longer to satisfy complex naming convention. To fix the above issue I had to cut the total string length of
name
's value. Replacing params with prefixags
byg
as follows passed the validationThe text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: