GraphClient for the high level REST client and associated tests

[markharwood]

Documentation yet to be done

[elasticmachine]

Pinging @elastic/es-core-infra

[elasticmachine]

Pinging @elastic/es-search-aggs

[markharwood]

test this please

[nik9000]

I think it'd be nice if these were private. We've been trying to be more "standard-java" in the rest client.

[nik9000]

I think ObjectParser would be easier to review but this looks right so I'm fine with it.

[nik9000]

I've borrowed a style from dakrone that looks like

builder.startObject("controls");
{
  if (sampleSize != ... ) {
    builder.field("sample_size", sampleSize);
  }
  ...
}
builder.endObject();

It sort of replaces the need for //=== Start Controls.

[nik9000]

They look like a chain! Woah!

[nik9000]

This one also looks right when I scan it but'd be easier to review as ObjectParser.

[markharwood]

I may be missing something but isn't ObjectParser more geared towards parsing "request" objects? Requests tend to have existing "Builder" classes with setter methods used by clients to express criteria and ObjectParser relies on registering setter methods.

Response objects tend to be immutable data objects so to accommodate ObjectParser we either end up adding "setter" methods to response objects (ugh) or creating non-public "ResponseBuilder" classes?

[nik9000]

ConstructingObjectParser can mostly get the job done without needing any extra builders. But sometimes builders are easier to understand. The idea with using these parsers is that they are a ton easier to review for correctness, especially that they properly ignore new fields. It isn't required, but it does make it easier to be sure that it is all rigged up right.

[hub-cap]

I have just committed #32596 which changes the location of the xpack clients. Its very likely your tests wont compile now that the xpack portion of client.xpack().yourCommercialClient() is removed.

[markharwood]

Many thanks for the review, @nik9000 . I've switched the code over to ObjectParser.

Good to go @nik9000 @hub-cap ?

[hub-cap]

thats a lot of blank lines!

[hub-cap]

if @nik9000 is good then Im good too. I just did a super quick eyeball and didnt see anything insane. if its got an approval from him... i was out all last week so im still coming back up to speed :)

[markharwood]

Any other budding reviewers you can suggest, @hub-cap ?

[hub-cap]

hey, yea Ill just do a review in the next 24 hrs. Im trying to get the actions fixed up first. Id prefer to get that merged, but if u get an approval first then GOGOGO.

[nik9000]

Left two little picky things but LGTM anyway. Thanks for working through all of my requests!

[nik9000]

I think maybe this should be testGraphExplore now that we're removing the xpack in lots of places.

[nik9000]

Why not a ctor that takes StreamInput and Map?

[markharwood]

Many thanks, @nik9000
I addressed your review comments and will push when I get a green result here.