QueryGroup Resource Tracking framework and implementation

[kiranprakash154]

Description

QueryGroupResourceUsageTrackerService - the main tracker class that builds resource usage views at the QueryGroup level.

Below is the test coverage report

Related Issues

#12342

Check List

• New functionality includes testing.
  • All tests pass
• New functionality has been documented.
  • New functionality has javadoc added
• API changes companion pull request created.
• Failing checks are inspected and point to the corresponding known issue(s) (See: Troubleshooting Failing Builds)
• Commits are signed per the DCO using --signoff
• Commit changes are listed out in CHANGELOG.md file (See: Changelog)
• Public documentation issue/PR created

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.
For more information on following Developer Certificate of Origin and signing off your commits, please check here.

[github-actions]

❌ Gradle check result for 225c31a: FAILURE

Please examine the workflow log, locate, and copy-paste the failure(s) below, then iterate to green. Is the failure a flaky test unrelated to your change?

[github-actions]

❌ Gradle check result for eb22efb: FAILURE

Please examine the workflow log, locate, and copy-paste the failure(s) below, then iterate to green. Is the failure a flaky test unrelated to your change?

[github-actions]

❌ Gradle check result for 6ff29bf: FAILURE

Please examine the workflow log, locate, and copy-paste the failure(s) below, then iterate to green. Is the failure a flaky test unrelated to your change?

[github-actions]

❌ Gradle check result for 44b30f4: FAILURE

Please examine the workflow log, locate, and copy-paste the failure(s) below, then iterate to green. Is the failure a flaky test unrelated to your change?

[github-actions]

❌ Gradle check result for fb31544: FAILURE

Please examine the workflow log, locate, and copy-paste the failure(s) below, then iterate to green. Is the failure a flaky test unrelated to your change?

[github-actions]

❌ Gradle check result for 68570d8: FAILURE

Please examine the workflow log, locate, and copy-paste the failure(s) below, then iterate to green. Is the failure a flaky test unrelated to your change?

[github-actions]

❌ Gradle check result for b3f71f2: FAILURE

Please examine the workflow log, locate, and copy-paste the failure(s) below, then iterate to green. Is the failure a flaky test unrelated to your change?

[github-actions]

❌ Gradle check result for 97a0986: FAILURE

Please examine the workflow log, locate, and copy-paste the failure(s) below, then iterate to green. Is the failure a flaky test unrelated to your change?

[github-actions]

❌ Gradle check result for 2b542a6: FAILURE

Please examine the workflow log, locate, and copy-paste the failure(s) below, then iterate to green. Is the failure a flaky test unrelated to your change?

[github-actions]

❌ Gradle check result for 7ae0005: FAILURE

Please examine the workflow log, locate, and copy-paste the failure(s) below, then iterate to green. Is the failure a flaky test unrelated to your change?

[github-actions]

❌ Gradle check result for 6e03383: FAILURE

Please examine the workflow log, locate, and copy-paste the failure(s) below, then iterate to green. Is the failure a flaky test unrelated to your change?

[github-actions]

❌ Gradle check result for 57b1a37: FAILURE

Please examine the workflow log, locate, and copy-paste the failure(s) below, then iterate to green. Is the failure a flaky test unrelated to your change?

[github-actions]

✅ Gradle check result for 5e17561: SUCCESS

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 71.86%. Comparing base (a918530) to head (36b559c).

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main   #13897      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     71.84%   71.86%   +0.01%     
- Complexity    62911    62974      +63     
============================================
  Files          5176     5178       +2     
  Lines        295133   295167      +34     
  Branches      42676    42679       +3     
============================================
+ Hits         212029   212112      +83     
+ Misses        65709    65658      -51     
- Partials      17395    17397       +2     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[github-actions]

❌ Gradle check result for 07e4a51: FAILURE

Please examine the workflow log, locate, and copy-paste the failure(s) below, then iterate to green. Is the failure a flaky test unrelated to your change?

[github-actions]

❌ Gradle check result for 98989ba: FAILURE

Please examine the workflow log, locate, and copy-paste the failure(s) below, then iterate to green. Is the failure a flaky test unrelated to your change?

[github-actions]

❕ Gradle check result for 8aeea17: UNSTABLE

• TEST FAILURES:

      1 org.opensearch.gateway.RecoveryFromGatewayIT.testShardStoreFetchMultiNodeMultiIndexesUsingBatchAction

Please review all flaky tests that succeeded after retry and create an issue if one does not already exist to track the flaky failure.

[github-actions]

❌ Gradle check result for 99a76dd: FAILURE

Please examine the workflow log, locate, and copy-paste the failure(s) below, then iterate to green. Is the failure a flaky test unrelated to your change?

[github-actions]

❌ Gradle check result for 8ce19f9: FAILURE

Please examine the workflow log, locate, and copy-paste the failure(s) below, then iterate to green. Is the failure a flaky test unrelated to your change?

[github-actions]

❌ Gradle check result for 6c4838f: FAILURE

Please examine the workflow log, locate, and copy-paste the failure(s) below, then iterate to green. Is the failure a flaky test unrelated to your change?

[jed326]

@kiranprakash154 can you please manually backport? Thanks

[jainankitk]

@jed326 - Regarding:

Also, for ease of backport you should keep your new changelog item on the bottom of the changelog, otherwise you'll most likely get a merge conflict when backporting to 2.x and the auto backport will fail.

I believe it to be otherwise, reasoning being if every PR puts at the bottom, automerge will show conflicts, but if they are interleaved that should not be the case. Ideally, we should fix this somehow!

[jainankitk]

Created #15149 to discuss this

[jed326]

In this specific case it's because I didn't catch that an item for an earlier PR went into the wrong changelog file, fixing that in #15150

[opensearch-trigger-bot]

The backport to 2.x failed:

The process '/usr/bin/git' failed with exit code 128

To backport manually, run these commands in your terminal:

# Navigate to the root of your repository
cd $(git rev-parse --show-toplevel)
# Fetch latest updates from GitHub
git fetch
# Create a new working tree
git worktree add ../.worktrees/OpenSearch/backport-2.x 2.x
# Navigate to the new working tree
pushd ../.worktrees/OpenSearch/backport-2.x
# Create a new branch
git switch --create backport/backport-13897-to-2.x
# Cherry-pick the merged commit of this pull request and resolve the conflicts
git cherry-pick -x --mainline 1 97c1bf01ff511c4db74dc8a81045447b009bec29
# Push it to GitHub
git push --set-upstream origin backport/backport-13897-to-2.x
# Go back to the original working tree
popd
# Delete the working tree
git worktree remove ../.worktrees/OpenSearch/backport-2.x

Then, create a pull request where the base branch is 2.x and the compare/head branch is backport/backport-13897-to-2.x.