Have 'aws rds wait db-cluster-available' (or similar) return when Aurora serverless v2 endpoints are actually available

[sondresb]

Not sure if this is a bug report, a feature request or even if I should RTFM more closely.

I am doing this at the end of a database restore of a Aurora serverless v2 cluster for QA and support reasons every night:

aws rds wait db-cluster-available \
    --profile $AWS_PROFILE \
    --db-cluster-identifier $CLUSTER_COPY_IDENTIFIER \
    --region $AWS_REGION

Where $CLUSTER_COPY_IDENTIFIER is the newly created cluster from a snapshot (with command aws rds restore-db-cluster-to-point-in-time).

My expectation (and I think the reality for serverless v1) would be for this to return when the cluster is actually up and running, accepting connections. This seems not to be the case, as I now have both the reader and writer instances in "Creating" for 40 mins after the creation, and the command returned after around 15 mins. Even if it was faster (the gap smaller), I would like to be able (preferably without try/fail, polling style) to be sure it is available for stuff like anonymization steps on the copy. I get "channel 7: open failed: connect failed: Name or service not known" on the bastion host tunnel. The tunnel works fine once the instance creation operations are complete.

Is there some other command? Sending ARN of the reader instance instead of the cluster? Or how would I go about doing this?

[adev-code]

Hello @sondresb, thanks for reaching out. I tried the command and was not able to see the issue. For a further look, please provide the full debug logs by adding --debug and redacting any sensitive information. Thanks.

[sondresb]

Yeah, I think doing the wait for instance after cluster avail as shown in the linked #9048 will do the trick for me. A flag to just issue a single command and wait for instances also being up, and the cluster ready to accept connections, would have been even better.

[imSanko]

I gave the solution for this issue https://github.com/aws/aws-cli/pull/9048 and it got merged let me know for the changes would've been required?

[adev-code]

@imSanko it looks like your PR (#9048) didn't actually include any changes. I'm not sure what happened there but could you highlight the changes you wanted to include or submit another PR? If there is an issue with the existing waiter model then the service team (in this case RDS) would need to implement the fix.

[github-actions]

Greetings! It looks like this issue hasn’t been active in longer than five days. We encourage you to check if this is still an issue in the latest release. In the absence of more information, we will be closing this issue soon. If you find that this is still a problem, please feel free to provide a comment or upvote with a reaction on the initial post to prevent automatic closure. If the issue is already closed, please feel free to open a new one.