repository-and-state-strategy

Monolithic State Is a Ticking Time Bomb

A single Terraform state file that contains your entire infrastructure is a liability disguised as simplicity. One bad terraform apply can destroy your network, databases, and compute in a single operation. One state file corruption locks out every team. One slow plan blocks every deployment. The blast radius is everything, and the recovery plan is "restore from backup and pray."

Production infrastructure demands intentional separation -- separate repositories for separate concerns, separate state files for separate layers, and numbered directories that encode dependency order at a glance. This is not premature optimization. It is the difference between an outage that takes down one monitoring dashboard and an outage that takes down your entire platform.

Multi-Repository Strategy

Infrastructure repositories should be split by change cadence and ownership. Organization-level IAM changes happen monthly. Network changes happen quarterly. Service deployments happen daily. Forcing all three through the same repository, the same review process, and the same CI pipeline creates friction where none should exist.

REPOSITORIES
|
+-- tf-root                          <-- Organization & IAM management
|   Scope: SSO, permissions, accounts, security delegation
|   Changes: Monthly (new users, permission updates)
|
+-- tf-global-infrastructure         <-- Shared infrastructure per environment
|   Scope: VPCs, security groups, databases, compute clusters, monitoring
|   Structure: Numbered layers (00-90) with env subdirectories
|   Changes: Weekly (new resources, configuration updates)
|
+-- tf-module-labels                 <-- Foundational naming/tagging module
+-- tf-module-alerts                 <-- Monitoring/alerting module
+-- tf-module-container-service      <-- Container orchestration module
|
+-- [per-service repos]              <-- App-specific infrastructure
    Each service manages its own Terraform alongside application code
    Changes: Daily (deployments, scaling, feature flags)

Why separate repos, not directories in a mono-repo?

• Access control: The root repo requires elevated permissions. Service repos do not.
• CI/CD isolation: A change to monitoring should not trigger a plan for networking.
• Review ownership: The platform team reviews shared infrastructure. Service teams review their own.
• Change cadence: Modules evolve on their own release cycle, independent of consumers.

Numbered Layer Architecture

Within the global infrastructure repository, directories are numbered to encode dependency order. Lower numbers are prerequisites for higher numbers. Numbering in steps of ten (00, 10, 20 ... not 1, 2, 3) reserves space to insert or split layers without renumbering -- if databases grow complex, split 30_databases into 30_relational and 35_caches without touching anything else.

tf-global-infrastructure/
+-- 00_network/              <-- VPCs, subnets, Route53, VPN, VPC endpoints
|   +-- dev/
|   +-- prod/
+-- 10_security/             <-- Security groups, IAM roles, KMS, WAF, certificates
|   +-- dev/
|   +-- prod/
+-- 20_storage/              <-- Object storage, file systems
|   +-- dev/
|   +-- prod/
+-- 30_databases/            <-- Relational databases, caches, warehouses
|   +-- dev/
|   +-- prod/
+-- 40_compute/              <-- Container clusters, auto-scaling, GPU instances
|   +-- dev/
|   +-- prod/
+-- 50_edge/                 <-- CDN, load balancers, API gateways
|   +-- prod/
+-- 60_messaging/            <-- Message brokers, event buses, queues
|   +-- dev/
|   +-- prod/
+-- 70_monitoring/           <-- Metrics, dashboards, log aggregation
|   +-- dev/
|   +-- prod/
+-- 80_ci_cd/                <-- Build runners, pipeline infrastructure
+-- 90_shared_services/      <-- Bastion hosts, service discovery
    +-- dev/
    +-- prod/

Not every layer needs per-environment subdirectories. Layers like 80_ci_cd (e.g., self-hosted GitHub runners) are shared infrastructure — there is no reason to duplicate build runners per environment in a startup. Similarly, 50_edge may only exist in production if there is no dev CDN or load balancer. Only create environment subdirectories where the resources are actually environment-specific.

Why This Works

Property	Benefit
Dependency encoding	Layer 40 (compute) cannot exist without layer 00 (network). The numbering makes this obvious.
Independent state	Each layer has its own state file. A bad apply in monitoring cannot destroy your network.
Independent CI/CD	Each layer can have its own pipeline. Network changes do not block compute deployments.
Clear mental model	New engineers understand the dependency graph in seconds, not hours.
Insert and split	Need to split databases into relational and caches? Insert 35_caches between 30 and 40 without renumbering anything.

Deployment Order

Layers deploy in numerical order. This is the full dependency chain:

tf-root (organization setup, SSO, security delegation)
  |
  v
00_network (VPCs, subnets, DNS, VPC endpoints)
  |
  v
10_security (security groups, KMS keys, certificates, WAF)
  |
  v
20_storage (object storage, file systems)
  |
  v
30_databases (relational databases, caches, warehouses)
  |
  v
40_compute (container clusters, auto-scaling groups)
  |
  v
50_edge (CDN distributions, load balancers)
  |
  v
60_messaging (message brokers, event buses, queues)
  |
  v
70_monitoring (metrics collection, dashboards, alerting)
  |
  v
80_ci_cd (build runners)
  |
  v
90_shared_services (bastion hosts, service discovery)

Dependencies are strictly forward: a layer may reference any lower-numbered layer via remote state, but never a higher-numbered one. Layer 50 can read from layers 00, 10, or 40 -- but layer 50 cannot depend on layer 60. This ensures the deployment chain is always acyclic and any layer can be planned or applied without waiting for higher layers to exist.

State Management: One State File Per Layer Per Environment

The cardinal rule of Terraform state management: every layer in every environment gets its own state file. No exceptions. No "we will split it later." Split it now.

State Bucket Strategy

One state bucket per cloud account (state buckets use <org>-<env>-tfstate as an exception
to the labels module naming -- they are account-global and need globally unique names):
  myorg-root-tfstate         <-- Root/management account
  myorg-security-tfstate     <-- Security account
  myorg-log-archive-tfstate  <-- Log archive account
  myorg-dev-tfstate          <-- Development account
  myorg-prod-tfstate         <-- Production account

Within each bucket, one key per layer or service:

myorg-dev-tfstate/
  network              <-- 00_network/dev state
  security             <-- 10_security/dev state
  storage              <-- 20_storage/dev state
  databases            <-- 30_databases/dev state
  compute              <-- 40_compute/dev state
  messaging            <-- 60_messaging/dev state
  monitoring           <-- 70_monitoring/dev state
  shared_services      <-- 90_shared_services/dev state
  myapp-api            <-- Service-owned state (separate repo)
  billing-service      <-- Service-owned state (separate repo)

State Properties (Non-Negotiable)

Every state bucket must have all four:

Property	Setting	Why
Encryption	AES-256 server-side	State contains secrets (database passwords, API keys)
Versioning	Enabled	Recover from accidental state corruption or deletion
Locking	Enabled	Prevent concurrent applies that corrupt state
Public access	Blocked	State files are the keys to your kingdom

Cross-Layer State References

Higher layers read outputs from lower layers using remote state data sources. This creates explicit, auditable dependency chains.

# 40_compute/dev/main.tf -- Compute reads from network and security

data "terraform_remote_state" "network" {
  backend = "s3"
  config = {
    bucket = "myorg-dev-tfstate"
    key    = "network"
    region = "eu-west-1"
  }
}

data "terraform_remote_state" "security" {
  backend = "s3"
  config = {
    bucket = "myorg-dev-tfstate"
    key    = "security"
    region = "eu-west-1"
  }
}

locals {
  vpc_id          = data.terraform_remote_state.network.outputs.vpc_id
  private_subnets = data.terraform_remote_state.network.outputs.private_subnets
  base_sg_ids     = data.terraform_remote_state.security.outputs.base_security_group_ids
}

Dependency chain in practice:

• compute reads from network + security
• databases reads from network + security
• monitoring reads from compute + network
• shared_services reads from network
• edge reads from compute + security

Good vs. Bad Patterns

Bad: Monolithic state file

myorg-dev-tfstate/
  everything          <-- One state file for ALL infrastructure

Problems: blast radius is everything. One bad apply can destroy networking, databases, and compute simultaneously. Plans take minutes as Terraform refreshes hundreds of resources. Two engineers cannot work on different layers in parallel.

Good: State per layer per environment

myorg-dev-tfstate/
  network             <-- 42 resources, 15-second plan
  security            <-- 28 resources, 10-second plan
  databases           <-- 15 resources, 8-second plan
  compute             <-- 35 resources, 12-second plan

Benefits: blast radius limited to one layer. Plans are fast. Engineers work on different layers in parallel. Recovery from corruption affects only one layer.

Bad: Environment state mixed together

# One state file contains both dev and prod resources
resource "aws_vpc" "dev" { cidr_block = "10.0.0.0/16" }
resource "aws_vpc" "prod" { cidr_block = "10.1.0.0/16" }

Problems: a mistake in dev configuration can destroy prod resources. No way to restrict who can modify prod without restricting dev.

Good: Separate directories, separate state, separate permissions

00_network/
  dev/   -> myorg-dev-tfstate/network
  prod/  -> myorg-prod-tfstate/network

Cloud Provider Translation

Concept	AWS	GCP	Azure
State backend	S3 bucket (use_lockfile)	GCS bucket (native locking)	Azure Blob Storage + lease locking
State encryption	AES-256 SSE-S3 or SSE-KMS	Default encryption (Google-managed or CMEK)	Storage Service Encryption (Microsoft-managed or CMK)
State locking	S3 native locking (use_lockfile = true)	GCS native locking	Blob lease locking
Remote state reference	terraform_remote_state with S3 backend	terraform_remote_state with GCS backend	terraform_remote_state with azurerm backend
Account isolation	AWS accounts via Organizations	GCP projects via folders	Azure subscriptions via Management Groups
State bucket per account	One S3 bucket per AWS account	One GCS bucket per GCP project	One Storage Account per Azure subscription

Examples

Working implementations in examples/:

• examples/numbered-layer-layout.md -- Complete directory structure for a global infrastructure repository with numbered layers, environment subdirectories, and backend configuration for each layer
• examples/cross-layer-state-references.md -- Terraform configurations showing how the compute layer reads outputs from network and security layers via remote state, including the backend configuration and output definitions

Review Checklist

When designing or reviewing repository and state architecture:

• Infrastructure is split across repositories by change cadence and ownership (root, global, modules, services)
• The global infrastructure repository uses numbered layers (00, 10, 20...) that encode dependency order
• Gap numbering is used (increments of 10) to allow future layer insertion without renumbering
• Every layer has a separate directory per environment (dev/, prod/)
• Every layer in every environment has its own state file (one state key per layer per environment)
• State buckets have encryption, versioning, locking, and public access blocking enabled
• Cross-layer dependencies use terraform_remote_state data sources, not hardcoded values
• The dependency chain flows downward only -- higher-numbered layers read from lower-numbered layers, never the reverse
• Service repositories have their own state keys, separate from infrastructure layers
• No state file contains resources from multiple environments
• State bucket naming follows a consistent convention (<org>-<env>-tfstate)
• The deployment order is documented and matches the numerical layer ordering