Search merge requestshttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests2023-12-03T20:26:53Zhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/589Health api2023-12-03T20:26:53ZRiabokon Stanislav(EPAM)[GCP]Health api## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud p...## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [ ] AWS
- [ ] Azure
- [ ] Google Cloud
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [YES/NO]
## What is the current behavior?
## What is the new/expected behavior?
## Have you added/updated Unit Tests and Integration Tests?
## Any other useful informationhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/588Changed a common path for health api2023-12-03T20:44:35ZRiabokon Stanislav(EPAM)[GCP]Changed a common path for health api## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [ ] AWS
- [ ] Azure
- [ ] Google Clou...## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [ ] AWS
- [ ] Azure
- [ ] Google Cloud
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [YES]
## What is the current behavior?
## What is the new/expected behavior?
search/v2/liveness_check
search/v2/readiness_check
## Have you added/updated Unit Tests and Integration Tests?
Yeshttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/587Pull latest os-core-common and update dependancy versions2023-12-04T18:56:59ZSolomon AyalewPull latest os-core-common and update dependancy versions## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provi...## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [ ] AWS
- [ ] Azure
- [ ] Google Cloud
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [NO]
## What is the current behavior?
## What is the new/expected behavior?
same as old
## Have you added/updated Unit Tests and Integration Tests?
## Any other useful informationM22 - Release 0.25https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/586Fix vulnerabilities2023-11-27T21:57:31ZVaibhavi KamaniFix vulnerabilities## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
- [x] S360 fix
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [NO]
## Does this introduce a change in ...## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
- [x] S360 fix
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [ ] AWS
- [x] Azure
- [ ] Google Cloud
- [ ] IBMVaibhavi KamaniVaibhavi Kamanihttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/585AWS - Merge from dev2023-11-27T19:30:40ZGuillaume CailletAWS - Merge from devOnly AWS specific changes.
* Add or update License header
* Upgrade AWS core libOnly AWS specific changes.
* Add or update License header
* Upgrade AWS core libM22 - Release 0.25Guillaume CailletGuillaume Caillethttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/584Implement autocomplete using suggester on bagOfWords field2024-03-12T18:48:42ZStanisław BienieckiImplement autocomplete using suggester on bagOfWords field## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [X] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/issues/135
## Does this introduce a cha...## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [X] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/issues/135
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [X] AWS
- [X] Azure
- [X] Google Cloud
- [X] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [NO] - This is adding new optional query and response fields, but nothing is changed for queries not using this features.
## What is the current behavior?
## What is the new/expected behavior?
## Have you added/updated Unit Tests and Integration Tests?
## Any other useful informationM23 - Release 0.26https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/583Fix the json-smart version for vulnerabilities fix2023-11-20T20:24:58ZVaibhavi KamaniFix the json-smart version for vulnerabilities fix## Type of change
- [x] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provi...## Type of change
- [x] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [ ] AWS
- [x] Azure
- [ ] Google Cloud
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [NO]
## Have you added/updated Unit Tests and Integration Tests?
No
## Testing
* Ran trivy image scan through the image right after the azure deploy step and seems there were no vulnerabilities as seen in the screenshot below.
![image](/uploads/49946a1333ba6ae9897efd82f2bd87aa/image.png)Vaibhavi KamaniVaibhavi Kamanihttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/582Draft: Empty change in m162023-10-23T20:07:28ZAdrian SaliDraft: Empty change in m16## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud p...## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [ ] AWS
- [ ] Azure
- [ ] Google Cloud
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [YES/NO]
## What is the current behavior?
## What is the new/expected behavior?
## Have you added/updated Unit Tests and Integration Tests?
## Any other useful informationhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/581Draft: Add empty change2023-10-25T23:09:13ZAdrian SaliDraft: Add empty change## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud p...## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [ ] AWS
- [ ] Azure
- [ ] Google Cloud
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [YES/NO]
## What is the current behavior?
## What is the new/expected behavior?
## Have you added/updated Unit Tests and Integration Tests?
## Any other useful informationhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/580Cherry-pick 'Full Upgrade of First Party Library Dependencies' into release/0.242023-10-20T07:52:38ZDavid Diederichd.diederich@opengroup.orgCherry-pick 'Full Upgrade of First Party Library Dependencies' into release/0.24**Original MR**: !576
### This MR is a Cherry Pick into a Release Branch.
After the release branch is first created, any subsequent changes use this process to update the release (often resulting in a new patch tag) without incorporati...**Original MR**: !576
### This MR is a Cherry Pick into a Release Branch.
After the release branch is first created, any subsequent changes use this process to update the release (often resulting in a new patch tag) without incorporating all changes in the default branch.
These MRs must be approved by the PMC before they are merged, since they alter the scope of the release.
To see more details about the change itself, look at the Original MR listed above.
#### Skipped Pipeline
Normally, pipelines are not executed on the cherry pick branch/MR prior to merging.
This optimization is accepted because the code was tested when it merged into the default branch, and will be tested again in the release branch prior to tagging.
However, if anybody feels that the MR requires further scrutiny -- whether because it had conflicts in the cherry-picking, it interfaces with some drastically altered logic between the branches, or any other reason -- we can run the pipeline here prior to merging.
#### If There's Reason to Run a Pipeline
If you want to see a pipeline result before this merges, first add a comment explaining why you'd like to see the pipeline results so the PMC and others know your thinking.
Then, mark the MR as a Draft MR (using the vertical ellipsis above, choose 'Mark as Draft').
This prevents the MR from being approved & merged accidentally by a busy release coordinator who didn't see your comment.
Finally, if you are a maintainer on the project, launch a pipeline on this branch.
Since this branch is a protected branch and the MR has ~no-detached-pipeline set, all integration tests will run and there's no need for any `trusted-*` branches.
[Launch a Pipeline for this Branch](https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/pipelines/new?ref=cherry-pick-for-576)M21 - Release 0.24David Diederichd.diederich@opengroup.orgChad LeongSrinivasan NarayananDavid Diederichd.diederich@opengroup.orghttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/579Cherry-pick 'Vulnerability fixes for jackson-databind' into release/0.242023-10-19T11:49:26ZChad LeongCherry-pick 'Vulnerability fixes for jackson-databind' into release/0.24**Original MR**: !565
### This MR is a Cherry Pick into a Release Branch.
After the release branch is first created, any subsequent changes use this process to update the release (often resulting in a new patch tag) without incorporati...**Original MR**: !565
### This MR is a Cherry Pick into a Release Branch.
After the release branch is first created, any subsequent changes use this process to update the release (often resulting in a new patch tag) without incorporating all changes in the default branch.
These MRs must be approved by the PMC before they are merged, since they alter the scope of the release.
To see more details about the change itself, look at the Original MR listed above.
#### Skipped Pipeline
Normally, pipelines are not executed on the cherry pick branch/MR prior to merging.
This optimization is accepted because the code was tested when it merged into the default branch, and will be tested again in the release branch prior to tagging.
However, if anybody feels that the MR requires further scrutiny -- whether because it had conflicts in the cherry-picking, it interfaces with some drastically altered logic between the branches, or any other reason -- we can run the pipeline here prior to merging.
#### If There's Reason to Run a Pipeline
If you want to see a pipeline result before this merges, first add a comment explaining why you'd like to see the pipeline results so the PMC and others know your thinking.
Then, mark the MR as a Draft MR (using the vertical ellipsis above, choose 'Mark as Draft').
This prevents the MR from being approved & merged accidentally by a busy release coordinator who didn't see your comment.
Finally, if you are a maintainer on the project, launch a pipeline on this branch.
Since this branch is a protected branch and the MR has ~no-detached-pipeline set, all integration tests will run and there's no need for any `trusted-*` branches.
[Launch a Pipeline for this Branch](https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/pipelines/new?ref=cherry-pick-for-565)M21 - Release 0.24David Diederichd.diederich@opengroup.orgChad LeongSrinivasan NarayananDavid Diederichd.diederich@opengroup.orghttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/578Cherry-pick 'Vulnerability fixes for jackson-databind' into release/0.242023-10-19T11:36:50ZChad LeongCherry-pick 'Vulnerability fixes for jackson-databind' into release/0.24**Original MR**: !565
### This MR is a Cherry Pick into a Release Branch.
After the release branch is first created, any subsequent changes use this process to update the release (often resulting in a new patch tag) without incorporati...**Original MR**: !565
### This MR is a Cherry Pick into a Release Branch.
After the release branch is first created, any subsequent changes use this process to update the release (often resulting in a new patch tag) without incorporating all changes in the default branch.
These MRs must be approved by the PMC before they are merged, since they alter the scope of the release.
To see more details about the change itself, look at the Original MR listed above.
#### Skipped Pipeline
Normally, pipelines are not executed on the cherry pick branch/MR prior to merging.
This optimization is accepted because the code was tested when it merged into the default branch, and will be tested again in the release branch prior to tagging.
However, if anybody feels that the MR requires further scrutiny -- whether because it had conflicts in the cherry-picking, it interfaces with some drastically altered logic between the branches, or any other reason -- we can run the pipeline here prior to merging.
#### If There's Reason to Run a Pipeline
If you want to see a pipeline result before this merges, first add a comment explaining why you'd like to see the pipeline results so the PMC and others know your thinking.
Then, mark the MR as a Draft MR (using the vertical ellipsis above, choose 'Mark as Draft').
This prevents the MR from being approved & merged accidentally by a busy release coordinator who didn't see your comment.
Finally, if you are a maintainer on the project, launch a pipeline on this branch.
Since this branch is a protected branch and the MR has ~no-detached-pipeline set, all integration tests will run and there's no need for any `trusted-*` branches.
[Launch a Pipeline for this Branch](https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/pipelines/new?ref=cherry-pick-for-565)M21 - Release 0.24David Diederichd.diederich@opengroup.orgChad LeongSrinivasan NarayananDavid Diederichd.diederich@opengroup.orghttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/577Cherry-pick 'Full Upgrade of First Party Library Dependencies' into release/0.242023-10-19T11:21:59ZChad LeongCherry-pick 'Full Upgrade of First Party Library Dependencies' into release/0.24**Original MR**: !562
### This MR is a Cherry Pick into a Release Branch.
After the release branch is first created, any subsequent changes use this process to update the release (often resulting in a new patch tag) without incorporati...**Original MR**: !562
### This MR is a Cherry Pick into a Release Branch.
After the release branch is first created, any subsequent changes use this process to update the release (often resulting in a new patch tag) without incorporating all changes in the default branch.
These MRs must be approved by the PMC before they are merged, since they alter the scope of the release.
To see more details about the change itself, look at the Original MR listed above.
#### Skipped Pipeline
Normally, pipelines are not executed on the cherry pick branch/MR prior to merging.
This optimization is accepted because the code was tested when it merged into the default branch, and will be tested again in the release branch prior to tagging.
However, if anybody feels that the MR requires further scrutiny -- whether because it had conflicts in the cherry-picking, it interfaces with some drastically altered logic between the branches, or any other reason -- we can run the pipeline here prior to merging.
#### If There's Reason to Run a Pipeline
If you want to see a pipeline result before this merges, first add a comment explaining why you'd like to see the pipeline results so the PMC and others know your thinking.
Then, mark the MR as a Draft MR (using the vertical ellipsis above, choose 'Mark as Draft').
This prevents the MR from being approved & merged accidentally by a busy release coordinator who didn't see your comment.
Finally, if you are a maintainer on the project, launch a pipeline on this branch.
Since this branch is a protected branch and the MR has ~no-detached-pipeline set, all integration tests will run and there's no need for any `trusted-*` branches.
[Launch a Pipeline for this Branch](https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/pipelines/new?ref=cherry-pick-for-562)M21 - Release 0.24David Diederichd.diederich@opengroup.orgChad LeongSrinivasan NarayananDavid Diederichd.diederich@opengroup.orghttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/576Full Upgrade of First Party Library Dependencies2023-10-20T07:05:06ZChad LeongFull Upgrade of First Party Library DependenciesThis generated MR upgrades the first party libraries (other OSDU libraries) to utilize the latest release.
The intent is to keep all dependent libraries up to date.
This upgrade can be merged immediately without further approval if the C...This generated MR upgrades the first party libraries (other OSDU libraries) to utilize the latest release.
The intent is to keep all dependent libraries up to date.
This upgrade can be merged immediately without further approval if the CI pipeline reports success.
If this MR has failed, we need to work with the maintainers and affected provider teams to find a solution.
### Dependency Information Before the Upgrade
```
Branch: master
SHA: c7afdbcf9d55ccf774a235d2a379bf99f37fec5a
Maven: 0.25.0-SNAPSHOT
```
| Maven Dependencies | _Root_ | testing/integration-tests/ |
| --------------------------------------------------- | ------ | -------------------------- |
| core-lib-azure | 0.23.2 | 0.23.2 |
| core-lib-gc | 0.24.0 | |
| os-core-lib-aws | 0.23.0 | 0.23.0 |
| os-core-common | 0.24.0 | 0.24.0 |
| os-core-lib-ibm | 0.23.0 | 0.23.0 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-api | 2.17.1 | 2.11.1, 2.13.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-core | 2.17.1 | 2.13.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-to-slf4j | 2.17.1 | 2.11.2 |
| (3rd Party) org.yaml.snakeyaml | 2.0 | 1.26, 1.27, 2.0 |
### Dependency Information After the Upgrade
```
Branch: dependency-upgrade-2
SHA: c2881edf5bda5b8b13c42b8be203feccc9ed655b
Maven: 0.25.0-SNAPSHOT
```
| Maven Dependencies | _Root_ | testing/integration-tests/ |
| --------------------------------------------------- | ------ | -------------------------- |
| core-lib-azure | 0.24.0 | 0.24.0 |
| core-lib-gc | 0.24.0 | |
| os-core-lib-aws | 0.24.0 | 0.24.0 |
| os-core-common | 0.24.0 | 0.24.0 |
| os-core-lib-ibm | 0.24.0 | 0.24.0 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-api | 2.17.1 | 2.11.1, 2.13.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-core | 2.17.1 | 2.13.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-to-slf4j | 2.17.1 | 2.11.2 |
| (3rd Party) org.yaml.snakeyaml | 2.0 | 1.26, 1.27, 2.0 |M21 - Release 0.24https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/575Delta changes m16 to m182023-10-17T20:55:24ZAdrian SaliDelta changes m16 to m18## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud p...## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [ ] AWS
- [ ] Azure
- [ ] Google Cloud
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [YES/NO]
## What is the current behavior?
## What is the new/expected behavior?
## Have you added/updated Unit Tests and Integration Tests?
## Any other useful informationhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/574retry in send method fixed for azure and added some logs2023-12-05T04:17:36ZHarshika Dhootretry in send method fixed for azure and added some logs## Type of change
- [X] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO] NO
## Does this introduce a change in the clou...## Type of change
- [X] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO] NO
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [ ] AWS
- [X] Azure
- [ ] Google Cloud
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [YES/NO] No
## What is the current behavior?
## What is the new/expected behavior? Retry in send method is implemented corectly
## Have you added/updated Unit Tests and Integration Tests?
## Any other useful information
ADME compatibility- uploaded the jar on sabz2 cloud onebox instance and this the line for search and indexer service compatible with es version change: [https://dev.azure.com/OpenEnergyPlatform/Open%20Energy%20Platform/_build/results?buildId=141775&view=logs&j=dfc3be73-f427-5789-ebe5-7e5af0890fe3&t=a93459da-1393-50f9-f822-6937915505e4](https://dev.azure.com/OpenEnergyPlatform/Open%20Energy%20Platform/_build/results?buildId=141775&view=logs&j=dfc3be73-f427-5789-ebe5-7e5af0890fe3&t=a93459da-1393-50f9-f822-6937915505e4)
from m18: there are 2 test failure- ![searchm18-adme](/uploads/ad0a966efd78303dc3328f2d7ba4c824/searchm18-adme.png)
from this branch: there are also same 2 failures, hence no breaking changes and similar compatibility with adme: ![searchm18-admey](/uploads/2c7605feddf63a704b29e4405dc1a66d/searchm18-admey.png)
green case: ![searchgreen](/uploads/21608400b2b75c713eabc185380ddba0/searchgreen.png)
4xx:![search4xx](/uploads/230d0d8ccdf46dbdb3b676d70fbf365a/search4xx.png)
5xx: we get the same error or 2nd retry attempt also ![search5xx](/uploads/98fd7042047b58f4c3f85e39a68ff98f/search5xx.png)Harshika DhootHarshika Dhoothttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/573Cherry-pick 'Upgrade First Party Library Dependencies for Release 0.24' into ...2023-10-17T11:32:03ZSrinivasan NarayananCherry-pick 'Upgrade First Party Library Dependencies for Release 0.24' into release/0.24**Original MR**: !572
### This MR is a Cherry Pick into a Release Branch.
After the release branch is first created, any subsequent changes use this process to update the release (often resulting in a new patch tag) without incorporati...**Original MR**: !572
### This MR is a Cherry Pick into a Release Branch.
After the release branch is first created, any subsequent changes use this process to update the release (often resulting in a new patch tag) without incorporating all changes in the default branch.
These MRs must be approved by the PMC before they are merged, since they alter the scope of the release.
To see more details about the change itself, look at the Original MR listed above.
#### Skipped Pipeline
Normally, pipelines are not executed on the cherry pick branch/MR prior to merging.
This optimization is accepted because the code was tested when it merged into the default branch, and will be tested again in the release branch prior to tagging.
However, if anybody feels that the MR requires further scrutiny -- whether because it had conflicts in the cherry-picking, it interfaces with some drastically altered logic between the branches, or any other reason -- we can run the pipeline here prior to merging.
#### If There's Reason to Run a Pipeline
If you want to see a pipeline result before this merges, first add a comment explaining why you'd like to see the pipeline results so the PMC and others know your thinking.
Then, mark the MR as a Draft MR (using the vertical ellipsis above, choose 'Mark as Draft').
This prevents the MR from being approved & merged accidentally by a busy release coordinator who didn't see your comment.
Finally, if you are a maintainer on the project, launch a pipeline on this branch.
Since this branch is a protected branch and the MR has ~no-detached-pipeline set, all integration tests will run and there's no need for any `trusted-*` branches.
[Launch a Pipeline for this Branch](https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/pipelines/new?ref=cherry-pick-for-572)M21 - Release 0.24David Diederichd.diederich@opengroup.orgChad LeongSrinivasan NarayananDavid Diederichd.diederich@opengroup.orghttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/572Upgrade First Party Library Dependencies for Release 0.242023-10-17T10:16:40ZDavid Diederichd.diederich@opengroup.orgUpgrade First Party Library Dependencies for Release 0.24This generated MR upgrades the first party libraries (other OSDU libraries) to utilize the latest release.
The intent is to keep the OSDU projects utilizing the latest available code to ensure widespread usage and stability.
However, any...This generated MR upgrades the first party libraries (other OSDU libraries) to utilize the latest release.
The intent is to keep the OSDU projects utilizing the latest available code to ensure widespread usage and stability.
However, any library that is older than the previous release will be left as-is, since the upgrade is likely to be more complicated.
Furthermore, the upgrade should only be merged in the CI pipeline reports success.
If this MR has failed, we can spend a little time investigating to see if a trivial upgrade could achieve compatiblity to the new library.
But significant upgrade efforts should not occur on this MR, as part of the release tagging process.
Instead, significant work should be scheduled for a subsequent milestone.
### Dependency Information Before the Upgrade
```
Branch: master
SHA: e9532730d69220fa6dbcb4301e12764ba8c29891
Maven: 0.24.0-SNAPSHOT
```
| Maven Dependencies | _Root_ | testing/integration-tests/ |
| ----------------------------------------------------- | ---------- | -------------------------- |
| core-lib-azure | 0.20.0-rc5 | 0.13.0-rc6 |
| core-lib-gc | 0.24.0-rc4 | |
| os-core-lib-aws | 0.21.0 | 0.21.0 |
| os-core-common | 0.23.1 | 0.23.1 |
| os-core-lib-ibm | 0.16.0-rc1 | 0.15.2 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-api | 2.17.1 | 2.11.1, 2.13.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-core | 2.17.1 | 2.13.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-jul | 2.17.1 | 2.13.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-slf4j-impl | 2.17.1 | 2.13.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-to-slf4j | 2.17.1 | 2.11.2 |
| (3rd Party) org.yaml.snakeyaml | 2.0 | 1.26 |
### Dependency Information After the Upgrade
```
Branch: dependency-upgrade
SHA: c93131508db7cfc8091cf130e43f559c2505fd11
Maven: 0.24.0-SNAPSHOT
```
| Maven Dependencies | _Root_ | testing/integration-tests/ |
| ----------------------------------------------------- | ---------- | -------------------------- |
| core-lib-azure | 0.20.0-rc5 | 0.13.0-rc6 |
| core-lib-gc | 0.24.0 | |
| os-core-lib-aws | 0.21.0 | 0.21.0 |
| os-core-common | 0.24.0 | 0.24.0 |
| os-core-lib-ibm | 0.16.0-rc1 | 0.15.2 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-api | 2.17.1 | 2.11.1, 2.13.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-core | 2.17.1 | 2.13.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-jul | 2.17.1 | 2.13.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-slf4j-impl | 2.17.1 | 2.13.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-to-slf4j | 2.17.1 | 2.11.2 |
| (3rd Party) org.yaml.snakeyaml | 2.0 | 1.26 |M21 - Release 0.24https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/571retry in send method update2023-10-20T05:43:00ZHarshika Dhootretry in send method update## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud p...## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [ ] AWS
- [ ] Azure
- [ ] Google Cloud
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [YES/NO]
## What is the current behavior?
## What is the new/expected behavior?
## Have you added/updated Unit Tests and Integration Tests?
## Any other useful informationHarshika DhootHarshika Dhoothttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/570[GONRG-7917] added replicas variable in helm2023-10-13T10:53:50ZAleksandr Primachenko [EPAM / GCP][GONRG-7917] added replicas variable in helm## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud p...## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [ ] AWS
- [ ] Azure
- [ ] Google Cloud
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [YES/NO]
## What is the current behavior?
## What is the new/expected behavior?
## Have you added/updated Unit Tests and Integration Tests?
## Any other useful informationM21 - Release 0.24Aleksandr Primachenko [EPAM / GCP]Aleksandr Primachenko [EPAM / GCP]