Schema merge requestshttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/schema-service/-/merge_requests2023-08-18T22:00:43Zhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/schema-service/-/merge_requests/34Actualize README.md for GCP (GONRG-804)2023-08-18T22:00:43ZRustam Lotsmanenko (EPAM)rustam_lotsmanenko@epam.comActualize README.md for GCP (GONRG-804)Module specific documentation:
- Project Title
- Getting Started
- Prerequisites
- Installation
- Run Locally
- Testing
- Running E2E Tests
- Deployment
- LicenceModule specific documentation:
- Project Title
- Getting Started
- Prerequisites
- Installation
- Run Locally
- Testing
- Running E2E Tests
- Deployment
- LicenceM1 - Release 0.1Rostislav Dublin (EPAM)Rostislav Dublin (EPAM)https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/schema-service/-/merge_requests/33updating key names to make code work against opendes tenant2023-08-18T22:00:45ZAman Vermaupdating key names to make code work against opendes tenant## All Submissions:
-------------------------------------
* [YES/NO] I have added an explanation of what changes in this merge do and why we should include it?- [YES]
* [YES/NO] I have updated the documentation accordingly. [N/A]
* [YES/...## All Submissions:
-------------------------------------
* [YES/NO] I have added an explanation of what changes in this merge do and why we should include it?- [YES]
* [YES/NO] I have updated the documentation accordingly. [N/A]
* [YES/NO/NA] I have added tests to cover my changes. [N/A]
* [YES/NO/NA] All new and existing tests passed.[YES]
* [YES/NO/NA] My code follows the code style of this project. [YES]
* [YES/NO/NA] I ran lint checks locally prior to submission. [N/A]
## What is the issue or story related to the change?
-------------------------------------
<!-- Please describe the current behavior that you are modifying, 'or' link to a relevant issue.
Feel free to add references to any design documents you might have shared with the team or any
related MR that you are building on top of. -->
Recently we have update the infrastructure against which Ci/CD pipelines run to become DP complaint. In this process we have moved away from having a single resource containing all the azure resources. Now each tenant has it's dedicated resource group. The naming convention of various keys in KV has also changed. e.g. erstwhile `cosmos-key` is now called `opendes-cosmos-key` for a tenant named `opendes`
High level design:
- The purpose of this MR is to make code changes work against any one tenant. That one tenant is `opendes` in this case. Hence updating the key names according to above mentioned convention. Now keys are called `opendes-cosmos-endpoint` and `opendes-cosmos-primary-key`.
- Updated the UTs
- updated the deployment.yaml file to reflect latest names of variables in key-vault
Issue: <!-- Link any __GitLab__ workitem(s) to this pull request. -->
Not running ITs. One integration test fails in azure environment due to a certain behaviour of Istio. Details here:
https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/lib/cloud/azure/os-core-lib-azure/-/issues/1
<!-- Please add implementation details of current set of changes and how the code changes are
doing what they are expected to do. Are there any complex loops or designated code blocks that
should be elaborated? Is there some contextual knowledge that the reviewer should be aware of? -->
Change details:
## Test coverage:
------------------
<!-- Mention unit test coverage of changes. -->
89%
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
-------------------------------------
- [YES/NO]
NO
<!-- If this introduces a breaking change, please describe the impact and migration path for existing applications below. -->
## Pending items
----------------
<!-- Are there changes that you'll introduce in upcoming MRs and hence did not add in this one? Next steps of your
feature can also be mentioned here. -->
NONE
## Reviewer request
-------------------
- Please provide an ETA when you plan to review this MR. Write a comment to decline or provide an ETA.
- Block the MR if you feel there is less testing or no details in the MR
- Please cover the following aspects in the MR
-- Coding design: _\<Reviewer1>_
-- Backward Compatibility: _\<Reviewer2>_
-- Feature Logic: _\<Logic design\>_
-- _\<Any other context mention here>_
OR
-- _\<Component 1>_: _\<Reviewer1>_
-- _\<CosmosDB>_: _\<Reviewer2>_
-- _\<ServiceBus>_ _\<Reviewer3>_
-- _\<Mention any other component and owner>_
## Other information
-------------------------------------
<!-- Any other information that is important to this MR such as screenshots of how the component looks before and after the change. -->
cc: @osdu/platform/roles/azure-contributorsM1 - Release 0.1Aman VermaAman Vermahttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/schema-service/-/merge_requests/31Added relative path again2023-08-18T22:00:47ZNeha SardaAdded relative path again@ethiraj : As per @wsmatth comment, I added relative path in this merge request. Please approve this change.@ethiraj : As per @wsmatth comment, I added relative path in this merge request. Please approve this change.M1 - Release 0.1https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/schema-service/-/merge_requests/30making the logs consistent with gcp implementation2023-08-18T22:00:48ZAman Vermamaking the logs consistent with gcp implementation## All Submissions:
-------------------------------------
* [YES/NO] I have added an explanation of what changes in this merge do and why we should include it?: YES
* [YES/NO] I have updated the documentation accordingly.: NA
* [YES/NO/N...## All Submissions:
-------------------------------------
* [YES/NO] I have added an explanation of what changes in this merge do and why we should include it?: YES
* [YES/NO] I have updated the documentation accordingly.: NA
* [YES/NO/NA] I have added tests to cover my changes. : NA
* [YES/NO/NA] All new and existing tests passed. YES
* [YES/NO/NA] My code follows the code style of this project. YES
* [YES/NO/NA] I ran lint checks locally prior to submission. NA
## What is the issue or story related to the change?
-------------------------------------
<!-- Please describe the current behavior that you are modifying, 'or' link to a relevant issue.
Feel free to add references to any design documents you might have shared with the team or any
related MR that you are building on top of. -->
Making the log messages consistent with what we have in GCP implementation
High level design:
Issue: <!-- Link any __GitLab__ workitem(s) to this pull request. -->
<!-- Please add implementation details of current set of changes and how the code changes are
doing what they are expected to do. Are there any complex loops or designated code blocks that
should be elaborated? Is there some contextual knowledge that the reviewer should be aware of? -->
Change details:
here is line by line comparison of logs added in both the CSP implementations:
AZURE IMPLEMENTATOIN
=======================
D:\OSDURepos2\schema-service\provider\schema-azure\src\main>findstr /s /i "log\." *.java
AzureAuthorityStore.java: log.warning(SchemaConstants.AUTHORITY_EXISTS_ALREADY_REGISTERED);
AzureAuthorityStore.java: log.error(MessageFormat.format(SchemaConstants.OBJECT_INVALID, ex.getMessage()));
AzureAuthorityStore.java: log.info(SchemaConstants.AUTHORITY_CREATED);
AzureEntityTypeStore.java: log.warning(SchemaConstants.ENTITY_TYPE_EXISTS);
AzureEntityTypeStore.java: log.error(MessageFormat.format(SchemaConstants.OBJECT_INVALID, ex.getMessage()));
AzureEntityTypeStore.java: log.info(SchemaConstants.ENTITY_TYPE_CREATED);
AzureSchemaInfoStore.java: log.warning(SchemaConstants.SCHEMA_ID_EXISTS);
AzureSchemaInfoStore.java: log.error(MessageFormat.format(SchemaConstants.OBJECT_INVALID, ex.getMessage()));
AzureSchemaInfoStore.java: log.info(SchemaConstants.SCHEMA_INFO_CREATED);
AzureSchemaInfoStore.java: log.error(MessageFormat.format(SchemaConstants.OBJECT_INVALID, ex.getMessage()));
AzureSchemaInfoStore.java: log.info(SchemaConstants.SCHEMA_INFO_UPDATED);
AzureSchemaInfoStore.java: log.error(SchemaConstants.INVALID_SUPERSEDEDBY_ID);
AzureSourceStore.java: log.warning(SchemaConstants.SOURCE_EXISTS);
AzureSourceStore.java: log.error(MessageFormat.format(SchemaConstants.OBJECT_INVALID, ex.getMessage()));
AzureSourceStore.java: log.info(SchemaConstants.SOURCE_CREATED);
AzureSchemaStore.java: log.info(SchemaConstants.SCHEMA_CREATED);
GCP IMPLEMENTATOIN
=====================
D:\OSDURepos2\schema-service\provider\schema-gcp\src\main>findstr /s /i "log\." *.java
GoogleAuthorityStore.java: log.warning(SchemaConstants.AUTHORITY_EXISTS_ALREADY_REGISTERED);
GoogleAuthorityStore.java: log.error(MessageFormat.format(SchemaConstants.OBJECT_INVALID, ex.getMessage()));
GoogleAuthorityStore.java: log.info(SchemaConstants.AUTHORITY_CREATED);
GoogleEntityTypeStore.java: log.warning(SchemaConstants.ENTITY_TYPE_EXISTS);
GoogleEntityTypeStore.java: log.error(MessageFormat.format(SchemaConstants.OBJECT_INVALID, ex.getMessage()));
GoogleEntityTypeStore.java: log.info(SchemaConstants.ENTITY_TYPE_CREATED);
GoogleSchemaInfoStore.java: log.warning(SchemaConstants.SCHEMA_ID_EXISTS);
GoogleSchemaInfoStore.java: log.error(SchemaConstants.OBJECT_INVALID);
GoogleSchemaInfoStore.java: log.info(SchemaConstants.SCHEMA_INFO_CREATED);
GoogleSchemaInfoStore.java: log.error(SchemaConstants.OBJECT_INVALID);
GoogleSchemaInfoStore.java: log.info(SchemaConstants.SCHEMA_INFO_UPDATED);
GoogleSchemaInfoStore.java: log.error(SchemaConstants.INVALID_SUPERSEDEDBY_ID);
GoogleSourceStore.java: log.warning(SchemaConstants.SOURCE_EXISTS);
GoogleSourceStore.java: log.error(SchemaConstants.OBJECT_INVALID);
GoogleSourceStore.java: log.info(SchemaConstants.SOURCE_CREATED);
GoogleSchemaStore.java: log.info(SchemaConstants.SCHEMA_CREATED);
## Test coverage:
------------------
<!-- Mention unit test coverage of changes. -->
No code changes
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
-------------------------------------
- [YES/NO]
NO
<!-- If this introduces a breaking change, please describe the impact and migration path for existing applications below. -->
## Pending items
----------------
<!-- Are there changes that you'll introduce in upcoming MRs and hence did not add in this one? Next steps of your
feature can also be mentioned here. -->
NONE
## Reviewer request
-------------------
- Please provide an ETA when you plan to review this MR. Write a comment to decline or provide an ETA.
- Block the MR if you feel there is less testing or no details in the MR
- Please cover the following aspects in the MR
-- Coding design: _\<Reviewer1>_
-- Backward Compatibility: _\<Reviewer2>_
-- Feature Logic: _\<Logic design\>_
-- _\<Any other context mention here>_
OR
-- _\<Component 1>_: _\<Reviewer1>_
-- _\<CosmosDB>_: _\<Reviewer2>_
-- _\<ServiceBus>_ _\<Reviewer3>_
-- _\<Mention any other component and owner>_
## Other information
-------------------------------------
<!-- Any other information that is important to this MR such as screenshots of how the component looks before and after the change. -->
cc: @osdu/platform/roles/azure-contributorsM1 - Release 0.1Aman VermaAman Vermahttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/schema-service/-/merge_requests/29GCP make enum value ACCOUNT_ID_COMMON_PROJECT configurable (GONRG-854)2023-08-18T22:00:50ZIgor Filippov (EPAM)GCP make enum value ACCOUNT_ID_COMMON_PROJECT configurable (GONRG-854)Description:
- Change for 'GoogleSchemaInfoStore' java class, the value now is taken not from the enum 'SchemaConstants' but from the properties.
- Added a property 'account.id.common.project'
# How to test:
Check business logic.
# C...Description:
- Change for 'GoogleSchemaInfoStore' java class, the value now is taken not from the enum 'SchemaConstants' but from the properties.
- Added a property 'account.id.common.project'
# How to test:
Check business logic.
# Changes include:
- [ ] Refactor (a non-breaking change that improves code maintainability).
- [ ] Bugfix (a non-breaking change that solves an issue).
- [x] New feature (a non-breaking change that adds functionality).
- [ ] Breaking change (a change that is not backward-compatible and/or changes current functionality).
# Changes in:
- [x] GCP
- [ ] Azure
- [ ] AWS
- [ ] IBM
# Dev Checklist:
- [ ] Added Unit Tests, wherever applicable.
- [ ] Updated the Readme, if applicable.
- [x] Existing Tests pass
- [x] Verified functionality locally
- [x] Self Reviewed my code for formatting and complex business logic.
# Other comments:
Any comments to approvers hereM1 - Release 0.1Dmitriy RudkoRostislav Dublin (EPAM)Dmitriy Rudkohttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/schema-service/-/merge_requests/28Use AWS CI master2020-09-18T17:08:30ZMatt WiseUse AWS CI masterM1 - Release 0.1Matt WiseMatt Wisehttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/schema-service/-/merge_requests/27AWS Provider Implementation for Schema Service2020-09-18T16:50:32ZMatt WiseAWS Provider Implementation for Schema ServiceM1 - Release 0.1Rucha DeshpandeMatt WiseRucha Deshpandehttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/schema-service/-/merge_requests/25Slb put errormsgfix2023-08-18T22:00:51ZAbhishek Kumar (SLB)Slb put errormsgfix**Summary**
When the user tries to create/update a schema using PUT API, the application tries to update the schema into the same tenant. If there is no schema found, it tries to create the schema with the same id. However, while creati...**Summary**
When the user tries to create/update a schema using PUT API, the application tries to update the schema into the same tenant. If there is no schema found, it tries to create the schema with the same id. However, while creating the schema it checks for its existence into the other schemas as well. For example, if the schema is created from PRIVATE tenant then it checks for the duplicate schema in COMMON tenant, and in another scenario, if the schema is created from COMMON tenant then it checks for the duplicate schema in all the private tenants.
**Steps to reproduce**
Create a schema that doesn't exist in the same tenant (PRIVATE) but in the common tenant.
**What is the current bug behavior?**
Currently, the error message returned is misleading which states:
> "Schema Id is already present"
**What is the expected correct behavior?**
The expected error message would be: "
> Update/Create failed because schema id is present in another tenant"M1 - Release 0.1Abhishek Kumar (SLB)Abhishek Kumar (SLB)https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/schema-service/-/merge_requests/24Changes to run test suit only once instead of thrice2023-08-18T22:00:53ZNeha SardaChanges to run test suit only once instead of thriceM1 - Release 0.1https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/schema-service/-/merge_requests/23adding helm charts for schema service2023-08-18T22:00:55ZAman Vermaadding helm charts for schema service- Adding helm charts for schema service
- updated `gitlab-ci.yml`
- updated 'fossa.yml'
- Added `DockerFile` for container generation
- Added README
These changes follow the pattern of similar changes made for wks service. https://commu...- Adding helm charts for schema service
- updated `gitlab-ci.yml`
- updated 'fossa.yml'
- Added `DockerFile` for container generation
- Added README
These changes follow the pattern of similar changes made for wks service. https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/data-flow/enrichment/wks/-/merge_requests?scope=all&utf8=%E2%9C%93&state=merged
FYI @polavishnu , @kibattul , @kiveerap , @danielscholl , @dkodeihM1 - Release 0.1Aman VermaAman Vermahttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/schema-service/-/merge_requests/21consuming new methods defined in BlobStore class2023-08-18T22:00:56ZAman Vermaconsuming new methods defined in BlobStore class
## All Submissions:
-------------------------------------
* [YES/NO] I have added an explanation of what changes in this merge do and why we should include it? YES
* [YES/NO] I have updated the documentation accordingly. YES
* [YES/NO/N...
## All Submissions:
-------------------------------------
* [YES/NO] I have added an explanation of what changes in this merge do and why we should include it? YES
* [YES/NO] I have updated the documentation accordingly. YES
* [YES/NO/NA] I have added tests to cover my changes. YES
* [YES/NO/NA] All new and existing tests passed. YES
* [YES/NO/NA] My code follows the code style of this project. YES
## What is the issue or story related to the change?
-------------------------------------
<!-- Please describe the current behavior that you are modifying, 'or' link to a relevant issue.
Feel free to add references to any design documents you might have shared with the team or any
related MR that you are building on top of. -->
High level design:
The BlobStore class container two types of methods for interacting with blob storage. One where we can supply the container name as parameter and other where it is not needed. Going forward, the second types of methods are being deprecated, hence updating all the blob storage related method calls to first type.
Issue: <!-- Link any __GitLab__ workitem(s) to this pull request. -->
N/A
<!-- Please add implementation details of current set of changes and how the code changes are
doing what they are expected to do. Are there any complex loops or designated code blocks that
should be elaborated? Is there some contextual knowledge that the reviewer should be aware of? -->
Change details:
1. Calling `*FromStorageContainer` methods instead of `*FromBlob` methods
2. Updated UTs.
3. Minor fixes: defining the `storage container name` in application.properties instead of hard coding it in code; reading the port number from environment variable rather than keeping it in properties file.
## Test coverage:
------------------
<!-- Mention unit test coverage of changes. -->
Unit test coverage: 89%
All integration tests passing locally.
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
-------------------------------------
- [YES/NO]
NO
<!-- If this introduces a breaking change, please describe the impact and migration path for existing applications below. -->
## Pending items
----------------
<!-- Are there changes that you'll introduce in upcoming MRs and hence did not add in this one? Next steps of your
feature can also be mentioned here. -->
Similar changes are required for WKS service
## Reviewer request
-------------------
- Please provide an ETA when you plan to review this MR. Write a comment to decline or provide an ETA.
- Block the MR if you feel there is less testing or no details in the MR
- Please cover the following aspects in the MR
-- Coding design: _\<Reviewer1>_
-- Backward Compatibility: _\<Reviewer2>_
-- Feature Logic: _\<Logic design\>_
-- _\<Any other context mention here>_
OR
-- _\<Component 1>_: _\<Reviewer1>_
-- _\<CosmosDB>_: _\<Reviewer2>_
-- _\<ServiceBus>_ _\<Reviewer3>_
-- _\<Mention any other component and owner>_
## Other information
-------------------------------------
<!-- Any other information that is important to this MR such as screenshots of how the component looks before and after the change. -->
FYI @kibattul , @polavishnu ,@danielscholl , @dkodeih , @harshit283M1 - Release 0.1Aman VermaAman Vermahttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/schema-service/-/merge_requests/20Updated CI CD pipeline to include IBM Int tests2020-09-16T09:50:25ZAnuj GuptaUpdated CI CD pipeline to include IBM Int testsUpdated CI CD pipeline to include IBM Int testsUpdated CI CD pipeline to include IBM Int testsM1 - Release 0.1Alan BrazAlan Brazhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/schema-service/-/merge_requests/19Ibm impl int fix merge2023-08-18T22:00:58ZAnuj GuptaIbm impl int fix mergeIBM Implement for add and verified all integration test cases successfully.
Pipeline for integration test addition pending.IBM Implement for add and verified all integration test cases successfully.
Pipeline for integration test addition pending.M1 - Release 0.1Alan BrazAlan Brazhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/schema-service/-/merge_requests/18storing the compact schema in schemaInfoStore2023-08-18T22:01:00ZAman Vermastoring the compact schema in schemaInfoStore
## All Submissions:
-------------------------------------
* [YES/NO] I have added an explanation of what changes in this merge do and why we should include it?: YES
* [YES/NO] I have updated the documentation accordingly.: YES
* [YES/NO...
## All Submissions:
-------------------------------------
* [YES/NO] I have added an explanation of what changes in this merge do and why we should include it?: YES
* [YES/NO] I have updated the documentation accordingly.: YES
* [YES/NO/NA] I have added tests to cover my changes.: YES
* [YES/NO/NA] All new and existing tests passed.: YES
* [YES/NO/NA] My code follows the code style of this project.: YES
* [YES/NO/NA] I ran lint checks locally prior to submission.: NA
## What is the issue or story related to the change?
-------------------------------------
<!-- Please describe the current behavior that you are modifying, 'or' link to a relevant issue.
Feel free to add references to any design documents you might have shared with the team or any
related MR that you are building on top of. -->
High level design:
Adding a new field called `schema` in `flattenedSchemaInfo` object. This will hold the compact schema (i.e. without expanding references). This field would be used for getting latest minor version, which in turn would be used for checking against any breaking changes in schema withing a major version. Please refer the issue linked to read more details.
Issue: <!-- Link any __GitLab__ workitem(s) to this pull request. -->
https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/schema-service/-/issues/15
<!-- Please add implementation details of current set of changes and how the code changes are
doing what they are expected to do. Are there any complex loops or designated code blocks that
should be elaborated? Is there some contextual knowledge that the reviewer should be aware of? -->
Change details:
1. Added new field in `flattenedSchemaInfo` class
2. This new field would hold the actual compact schema passed by user
3. This compact schema will now be used for checking against breaking changes
4. Removed the `AzureSchemaStore` object, which previously was being used for fetching schema
5. Updated UTs
## Test coverage:
------------------
Ran Integration test for this scenario locally.
<!-- Mention unit test coverage of changes. -->
Coverage of class: 89%
![image](/uploads/08ddf1ef3e0f6056ea092962369d5e35/image.png)
Coverage of the lines changed: 100%
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
-------------------------------------
- [YES/NO]
NO
<!-- If this introduces a breaking change, please describe the impact and migration path for existing applications below. -->
## Pending items
----------------
<!-- Are there changes that you'll introduce in upcoming MRs and hence did not add in this one? Next steps of your
feature can also be mentioned here. -->
N/A
## Reviewer request
-------------------
- Please provide an ETA when you plan to review this MR. Write a comment to decline or provide an ETA.
- Block the MR if you feel there is less testing or no details in the MR
- Please cover the following aspects in the MR
-- Coding design: _\<Reviewer1>_
-- Backward Compatibility: _\<Reviewer2>_
-- Feature Logic: _\<Logic design\>_
-- _\<Any other context mention here>_
OR
-- _\<Component 1>_: _\<Reviewer1>_
-- _\<CosmosDB>_: _\<Reviewer2>_
-- _\<ServiceBus>_ _\<Reviewer3>_
-- _\<Mention any other component and owner>_
## Other information
-------------------------------------
<!-- Any other information that is important to this MR such as screenshots of how the component looks before and after the change. -->
@kibattul , @polavishnu FYIM1 - Release 0.1Aman VermaAman Vermahttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/schema-service/-/merge_requests/17enabling slf4jlogger and transaction logger for schema service/ azure impleme...2023-08-18T22:01:01ZAman Vermaenabling slf4jlogger and transaction logger for schema service/ azure implementationEnabling slf4jlogger and transaction logger for schema service/ azure implementation.
After enabling this, logs would start to flow into azure app insights.
Reference MR:
https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/security-and-compli...Enabling slf4jlogger and transaction logger for schema service/ azure implementation.
After enabling this, logs would start to flow into azure app insights.
Reference MR:
https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/security-and-compliance/entitlements-azure/-/merge_requests/13
@kibattul/ @polavishnu FYIM1 - Release 0.1Aman VermaAman Vermahttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/schema-service/-/merge_requests/16Latest version schema changes2023-08-18T22:01:03ZAbhishek Kumar (SLB)Latest version schema changesIf lastestVersion=true, API end users to receive latest schema version for specific Authority, Source, and Entity.If lastestVersion=true, API end users to receive latest schema version for specific Authority, Source, and Entity.M1 - Release 0.1https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/schema-service/-/merge_requests/15miscellaneous changes2023-08-18T22:01:04ZAman Vermamiscellaneous changesAs part of this PR,
1. using the `BlobStore` class from `azure-core-lib`. Removing the local implementation/ updated UTs
2. Using `createItem` method instead of `upsertItem` from `cosmosStore` class wherever applicable. Updated UTs
3. U...As part of this PR,
1. using the `BlobStore` class from `azure-core-lib`. Removing the local implementation/ updated UTs
2. Using `createItem` method instead of `upsertItem` from `cosmosStore` class wherever applicable. Updated UTs
3. Updated README to add instructions to run Integration tests.
4. Added script to generate JWT in azure. To be consumed by deployment scripts
FYI @polavishnu , @kibattulM1 - Release 0.1Aman VermaAman Vermahttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/schema-service/-/merge_requests/14Adding logic to generate Bearer token for azure, to be used in Integration Tests2023-08-18T22:01:06ZAman VermaAdding logic to generate Bearer token for azure, to be used in Integration TestsThis PR contains following set of changes:
1. Added logic to generate JWT token to be used for integration testing for azure
2. Updated REST api endpoint name to `api/schema-service/v1` to make it consistent with gcp
3. Minor fix in the ...This PR contains following set of changes:
1. Added logic to generate JWT token to be used for integration testing for azure
2. Updated REST api endpoint name to `api/schema-service/v1` to make it consistent with gcp
3. Minor fix in the existing provider/azure code where while calling Cosmos DB related apis, cross partition query was disable. Enabling it as it is required by underlying cosmosStore class. Added corresponding UTs.M1 - Release 0.1Aman VermaAman Vermahttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/schema-service/-/merge_requests/12addressig MR comments of previous PR2023-08-18T22:01:08ZAman Vermaaddressig MR comments of previous PRAddressing comments of previous MR https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/schema-service/-/merge_requests/10/diffs#c02267a31a5cfbc0087047cca78d81f0461efca5
@kibattul, FYIAddressing comments of previous MR https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/schema-service/-/merge_requests/10/diffs#c02267a31a5cfbc0087047cca78d81f0461efca5
@kibattul, FYIM1 - Release 0.1https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/schema-service/-/merge_requests/11Updated folder structure for schema service2023-08-18T22:01:09ZNeha SardaUpdated folder structure for schema serviceM1 - Release 0.1