test(bigtable): add conformance test for FailsOnEmptyMetadata and FailsOnExecuteQueryMetadata

[mpeddada1]

No description provided.

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @mpeddada1, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request refines the Bigtable client's handling of ExecuteQuery responses, specifically regarding metadata. It shifts the client's behavior to consider any metadata returned in an ExecuteQueryResponse as an internal error, simplifying the logic previously used for schema change detection. This change is accompanied by updates to conformance tests, ensuring that scenarios involving unexpected metadata are correctly identified and handled, and that the client's behavior aligns with the intended protocol.

Highlights

• Metadata Handling in ExecuteQuery: The client-side logic for ExecuteQueryResponse has been updated to treat the presence of any metadata as an InternalError, rather than performing schema change detection.
• Simplified DefaultPartialResultSetReader: The DefaultPartialResultSetReader class no longer stores or compares an initial_metadata_ field, simplifying its internal state and constructor.
• Conformance Test Activation: The run_conformance_tests_proxy_bazel.sh script has been modified to enable conformance tests related to FailsOnEmptyMetadata and FailsOnExecuteQueryMetadata, indicating these scenarios are now expected to be handled by the updated client logic.
• Test Suite Refinements: Existing ExecuteQuery tests have been adjusted to remove expectations of metadata being returned in successful responses and to reflect the new InternalError status for unexpected metadata.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request enables two conformance tests, FailsOnEmptyMetadata and FailsOnExecuteQueryMetadata, by correctly treating metadata in ExecuteQuery responses as an internal error. The implementation changes and corresponding test updates are logical and well-executed. I have a few minor suggestions to improve code maintainability and test consistency.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 95.00000% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 92.95%. Comparing base (887d7d0) to head (b0966c8).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...oud/bigtable/internal/data_connection_impl_test.cc	92.30%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #15784      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   92.95%   92.95%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files        2454     2454              
  Lines      226903   226878      -25     
==========================================
- Hits       210919   210885      -34     
- Misses      15984    15993       +9     

☔ 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.