SYM-2983: Resume transfer of large batches using HTTP Range headers

[evan-miller-jumpmind]

No description provided.

[evan-miller-jumpmind]

I'm taking a look at the Sonar alerts.

[Andrew Webb (w3bbd3v-jm)]

Are we sure we want to include this in 3.18? The scope for 3.18 is already rather large and we still have a lot of testing to go. Including another new feature seems to bloat the release even more than it is. Maybe it's time we open release/3.19?

[evan-miller-jumpmind]

Are we sure we want to include this in 3.18? The scope for 3.18 is already rather large and we still have a lot of testing to go. Including another new feature seems to bloat the release even more than it is. Maybe it's time we open release/3.19?

We're leaning towards including it in 3.18, but we still need to make a final decision. I created a lab environment in symmetric-labs to make it easier to test this change.

[evan-miller-jumpmind]

I fixed most of the Sonar alerts and now only 8 remain.

The Sonar warning in FileSyncService.handleExtractionError() is inaccurate. The currentBatch variable can't use log.error()'s built-in formatting or else e will be treated as a variable to be substituted into the string rather than an exception, which will cause an exception to be thrown.

The 3 Sonar failures related to closing streams are false positives. The HttpOutgoingTransport and HttpIncomingTransport own these streams and handle closing them.

The Sonar failure on FileSyncService.processUnzippedBatches() is on pre-existing logic that I extracted into a renamed method. It would be high-risk to resolve it, so I left it as it is.

Three of the alerts in StagedResource are on code that I didn't touch at all. The root cause of the failure in getWriter() is actually in buildFile(), which is untouched.

[Pavel_JM (pavel-jm)]

new feature seems to bloat

We have reviewed this feature in the team meeting.
Let me know if you'd like us to schedule another meeting on this topic?

[Pavel_JM (pavel-jm)]

Thanks! I'll share additional details over chat

[Andrew Webb (w3bbd3v-jm)]

new feature seems to bloat

We have reviewed this feature in the team meeting. Let me know if you'd like us to schedule another meeting on this topic?

My vote is for 3.19.

[evan-miller-jumpmind]

I'm taking a look at the 7 new Sonar alerts.

[Pavel_JM (pavel-jm)]

It appears there are two SonarQube findings worth a follow up.
Both are for the same resource-leak prevention practice:

Use try-with-resources or close this "OutputStream" in a "finally" clause.

[evan-miller-jumpmind]

It appears there are two SonarQube findings worth a follow up. Both are for the same resource-leak prevention practice:

Use try-with-resources or close this "OutputStream" in a "finally" clause.

When I looked at this before, I found that the 3 Sonar failures related to closing streams are false positives. The HttpOutgoingTransport and HttpIncomingTransport own these streams and handle closing them.

[evan-miller-jumpmind]

We decided to move this feature to 3.19. I'll mark this PR as a draft for now and change the target branch to release/3.19 once it's available.

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate failed

Failed conditions
E Security Rating on New Code (required ≥ A)
E Reliability Rating on New Code (required ≥ A)

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

Catch issues before they fail your Quality Gate with our IDE extension SonarQube for IDE