[ES][v2] Refactor the Factory of V1 to make it reusable for V2

[Manik2708]

Which problem is this PR solving?

• Fixes a part of: [Feature]: Upgrade Elasticsearch Storage to v2 API #7034

Description of the changes

• Refactor the Factory of V1 to make it reusable for v2

How was this change tested?

• Unit And Integration Tests

Checklist

• I have read https://github.com/jaegertracing/jaeger/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING_GUIDELINES.md
• I have signed all commits
• I have added unit tests for the new functionality
• I have run lint and test steps successfully
  • for jaeger: make lint test
  • for jaeger-ui: npm run lint and npm run test

[Manik2708]

This PR is for getting a direction, will complete the code-coverage once the approach is finalized

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 95.19231% with 10 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 96.21%. Comparing base (5877787) to head (c0dcfbd).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
internal/storage/v1/elasticsearch/factory.go	92.10%	4 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
internal/storage/v1/elasticsearch/helper.go	86.66%	3 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #7086      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   96.24%   96.21%   -0.04%     
==========================================
  Files         358      361       +3     
  Lines       21689    21748      +59     
==========================================
+ Hits        20875    20924      +49     
- Misses        609      616       +7     
- Partials      205      208       +3     

Flag	Coverage Δ
badger_v1	9.86% <0.00%> (-0.04%)	⬇️
badger_v2	2.04% <0.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
cassandra-4.x-v1-manual	14.84% <0.00%> (-0.06%)	⬇️
cassandra-4.x-v2-auto	2.03% <0.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
cassandra-4.x-v2-manual	2.03% <0.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
cassandra-5.x-v1-manual	14.84% <0.00%> (-0.06%)	⬇️
cassandra-5.x-v2-auto	2.03% <0.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
cassandra-5.x-v2-manual	2.03% <0.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
elasticsearch-6.x-v1	20.67% <57.06%> (+0.43%)	⬆️
elasticsearch-7.x-v1	20.75% <57.06%> (+0.43%)	⬆️
elasticsearch-8.x-v1	20.93% <57.06%> (+0.43%)	⬆️
elasticsearch-8.x-v2	2.04% <0.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
grpc_v1	11.40% <0.00%> (-0.05%)	⬇️
grpc_v2	2.04% <0.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
kafka-3.x-v1	10.14% <0.00%> (-0.04%)	⬇️
kafka-3.x-v2	2.04% <0.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
memory_v2	2.04% <0.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
opensearch-1.x-v1	20.80% <57.06%> (+0.43%)	⬆️
opensearch-2.x-v1	20.80% <57.06%> (+0.43%)	⬆️
opensearch-2.x-v2	2.04% <0.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
query	2.04% <0.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
tailsampling-processor	0.55% <0.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
unittests	95.02% <92.78%> (-0.05%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[Manik2708]

@yurishkuro I have some questions and problems:

1. CI is green (integration tests of ES/OS for v2 are passing), does that mean the v2 factory is alright?
2. I can't get the reason why build binaries is failing, can you help here?
3. There are some problems I am getting while completing the code-coverage: How to cover the mapping builder error and NewFactoryWithConfig as it initalizes the client internally so we can't mock the client.

[yurishkuro]

almost ready

[Manik2708]

#7086 (comment) Thanks for this! I now got reminded that we can use CoreSpanWriter in the tests which is also shared by both v1 and v2

[yurishkuro]

@Manik2708 congrats! this was a difficult PR, any lessons learned how this could've gone smoother / faster?

[Manik2708]

@Manik2708 congrats! this was a difficult PR, any lessons learned how this could've gone smoother / faster?

@yurishkuro Thanks! I learnt so many lessons. 3 months before I didn't have any experience in writing good code but now I can say I have a bit. The biggest lesson I learnt was that I need to think from the reviewer point of view also. I think that was the reason why sometimes things went slow! Sometimes changes were large and sometimes unnecessary. So will try to review the PRs in future of other contributors so that while writing code I visualize the needs of reviewer so as to make the job of reviewer easy. Thanks a lot for your patience!