fix: migrate to Flex Consumption plan with blobContributor role#11
Conversation
…r secure deployment container access
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: dc842e28d6
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
| functionAppConfig: { | ||
| deployment: { | ||
| storage: { | ||
| type: 'blobContainer' | ||
| value: 'https://${storageAccountName}.blob.${environment().suffixes.storage}/app-package' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When this Flex Consumption template is deployed, the new functionAppConfig only defines the code package container; the app settings still never define the required AzureWebJobsStorage/AzureWebJobsStorage__* host-storage connection. Because the storage account disables shared-key access, the Functions host has neither a connection string nor an identity-based host storage configuration, so the deployed function app won't be able to start reliably or serve the ingress function after rollout. Add the host storage app setting(s) and the matching storage RBAC for that connection.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
2 participants
Rescues a local-main commit (dc842e2, parallel Gemini session) stranded by branch protection: Flex Consumption migration + blobContributor role for secure deployment container access (aligns with GLOBAL_AGENTS Flex Consumption standard). Part of Phase 30 branch-hygiene cleanup.
🤖 Generated with Claude Code