SNOW-2081762: Handle no session during Sproc, UDxF registration

[sfc-gh-heshah]

1. Which Jira issue is this PR addressing? Make sure that there is an accompanying issue to your PR.

   Fixes SNOW-2081762

2. Fill out the following pre-review checklist:

   • I am adding a new automated test(s) to verify correctness of my new code
     • If this test skips Local Testing mode, I'm requesting review from @snowflakedb/local-testing
   • I am adding new logging messages
   • I am adding a new telemetry message
   • I am adding new credentials
   • I am adding a new dependency
   • If this is a new feature/behavior, I'm adding the Local Testing parity changes.
   • I acknowledge that I have ensured my changes to be thread-safe. Follow the link for more information: Thread-safe Developer Guidelines
   • If adding any arguments to public Snowpark APIs or creating new public Snowpark APIs, I acknowledge that I have ensured my changes include AST support. Follow the link for more information: AST Support Guidelines

3. Please describe how your code solves the related issue.

   Allow Sproc/UDxF creation/registration without a live session. An active session is assumed to be required at the call site of the resultant Sproc/UDxF.

[sfc-gh-snowflakedb-snyk-sa]

🎉 Snyk checks have passed. No issues have been found so far.

✅ security/snyk check is complete. No issues have been found. (View Details)

✅ license/snyk check is complete. No issues have been found. (View Details)

[sfc-gh-heshah]

• SNOW-2081762: Handle no session during Sproc, UDxF registration #3331 👈 (View in Graphite)
• main

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

[sfc-gh-jrose]

Is information being lost when the session is not initialized?

[sfc-gh-heshah]

The source information from where session.{sproc,udaf,udf,udtf}.register is called will be lost.

[sfc-gh-aalam]

Why can't we still capture the source information when session is None? source read only depends on reading python call stack and frames right?

[sfc-gh-heshah]

Eventually we will be able to once Snowpark object own their AST statements, but for now because Bind statements can only be created in association with a Session instance that owns an AstBatch instance, we will lose the call stack and frames from this point in the code.

[sfc-gh-aling]

is it possible session is still None here?

[sfc-gh-heshah]

As far as I can tell, if you try to call a UDxF without an active session, it means it will not have been registered in the first place.

This is likely moving the eventual failure slightly earlier in the pipeline, where if the session is still None here, _get_active_session() will raise an error.

[sfc-gh-aling]

I may overlook but I didn't see any caller passing the _session parameter?
when is this parameter used?

[sfc-gh-heshah]

Thank you for catching this! Missed passing in the _session parameter at the call sites in UDFRegistration methods in this file.