Add e2e test for docker-compose-elasticsearch.yml file

[pipiland2612]

Which problem is this PR solving?

• Partly solve [W1]: SPM Development environment #7142

Description of the changes

• Add e2e test to exercise docker-compose-elasticsearch.yml file

How was this change tested?

• Through system test

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

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 96.22%. Comparing base (eb85aa5) to head (1dfaf73).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #7145   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   96.22%   96.22%           
=======================================
  Files         358      358           
  Lines       21689    21689           
=======================================
  Hits        20870    20870           
  Misses        613      613           
  Partials      206      206           

Flag	Coverage Δ
badger_v1	9.90% <ø> (ø)
badger_v2	2.05% <ø> (ø)
cassandra-4.x-v1-manual	14.89% <ø> (ø)
cassandra-4.x-v2-auto	2.04% <ø> (ø)
cassandra-4.x-v2-manual	2.04% <ø> (ø)
cassandra-5.x-v1-manual	14.89% <ø> (ø)
cassandra-5.x-v2-auto	2.04% <ø> (ø)
cassandra-5.x-v2-manual	2.04% <ø> (ø)
elasticsearch-6.x-v1	20.23% <ø> (ø)
elasticsearch-7.x-v1	20.31% <ø> (ø)
elasticsearch-8.x-v1	20.49% <ø> (ø)
elasticsearch-8.x-v2	2.05% <ø> (ø)
grpc_v1	11.44% <ø> (ø)
grpc_v2	2.05% <ø> (ø)
kafka-3.x-v1	10.17% <ø> (ø)
kafka-3.x-v2	2.05% <ø> (ø)
memory_v2	2.05% <ø> (ø)
opensearch-1.x-v1	20.36% <ø> (ø)
opensearch-2.x-v1	20.36% <ø> (ø)
opensearch-2.x-v2	2.05% <ø> (ø)
query	2.05% <ø> (ø)
tailsampling-processor	0.55% <ø> (ø)
unittests	95.04% <ø> (ø)

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.

[yurishkuro]

fyi - you may want to fix this in the follow-up PR (it's an old bug):

+ assert_service_name_equals '{"name":"service_call_rate","type":"GAUGE","help":"calls/sec, grouped by service","metrics":[]}' driver
+ local 'response={"name":"service_call_rate","type":"GAUGE","help":"calls/sec, grouped by service","metrics":[]}'
+ local expected=driver
++ echo '{"name":"service_call_rate","type":"GAUGE","help":"calls/sec, grouped by service","metrics":[]}'
++ jq -r 'if .metrics and .metrics[0] then .metrics[0].labels[] | select(.name=="service_name") | .value else empty end'
+ service_name=
+ [[ '' != \d\r\i\v\e\r ]]
+ echo '❌ ERROR: Obtained service_name: '\'''\'' are not same as expected: '\''driver'\'''
+ return 1
❌ ERROR: Obtained service_name: '' are not same as expected: 'driver'
+ return 1
+ sleep 10

This isn't actually an error, but a timing issue, the error would be only if there was no match after all the retries