test(amber): cover WebSocket payload tuning

[aglinxinyuan]

What changes were proposed in this PR?

Adds focused unit coverage for servlet WebSocket container lookup and the configured text and binary payload limits, including exact one-KiB byte conversion.

Any related issues, documentation, discussions?

Closes #7217

How was this PR tested?

• WorkflowExecutionService/testOnly org.apache.texera.web.resource.WebsocketPayloadSizeTunerSpec — 2 passed.
• WorkflowExecutionService/Test/scalafmtCheck
• WorkflowExecutionService/Test/scalafix --check

Mutation proof (each production mutation was reverted):

Production mutation	Focused test result
Changed the text-buffer multiplier from 1024 to 1000	0 passed, 2 failed
Removed the binary-buffer setter	0 passed, 2 failed

Was this PR authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?

Generated-by: Codex (GPT-5)

[github-actions]

Automated Reviewer Suggestions

Based on the git blame history of the changed files, we recommend the following reviewers:

• No candidates found from git blame history.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Adds a focused ScalaTest/ScalaMock unit spec in Amber’s web resources to validate that WebsocketPayloadSizeTuner looks up the servlet ServerContainer correctly and applies configured WebSocket payload limits using exact KiB-to-bytes conversion.

Changes:

• Added a new unit spec that asserts servlet ServerContainer is retrieved via classOf[ServerContainer].getName.
• Added assertions that both text and binary buffer limits are set, including the exact 1 KiB == 1024 bytes boundary.

---

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

[github-actions]

⚠️ Benchmark changes need a look

🟢 0 better · 🔴 3 worse · ⚪ 12 noise (<±5%) · 0 without baseline

Compared against main 18ebb0d benchmarked on this same runner, so the delta is largely free of cross-runner hardware noise. The "7d avg" column still reflects the gh-pages dashboard. Treat <±5% as noise unless repeated.

Dashboard · Run

	config	throughput	MB/s	latency	max Δ latest / 7d
⚪	bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	382	0.233	25,261/36,755/36,755 us	⚪ within ±5% / 🔴 +126.9%
🔴	bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	759	0.463	129,295/163,000/163,000 us	🔴 +8.5% / 🔴 +47.1%
⚪	bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	914	0.558	1,094,077/1,131,739/1,131,739 us	⚪ within ±5% / 🔴 -7.9%

Baseline details

Latest main 18ebb0d from same runner

config	metric	PR	latest main	7d avg	Δ latest	Δ 7d
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	382 tuples/sec	399 tuples/sec	765.25 tuples/sec	-4.3%	-50.1%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.233 MB/s	0.243 MB/s	0.467 MB/s	-4.1%	-50.1%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p50	25,261 us	24,650 us	12,703 us	+2.5%	+98.9%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p95	36,755 us	36,194 us	16,199 us	+1.5%	+126.9%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p99	36,755 us	36,194 us	19,557 us	+1.5%	+87.9%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	759 tuples/sec	810 tuples/sec	965.22 tuples/sec	-6.3%	-21.4%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.463 MB/s	0.494 MB/s	0.589 MB/s	-6.3%	-21.4%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p50	129,295 us	119,210 us	103,830 us	+8.5%	+24.5%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p95	163,000 us	165,860 us	110,778 us	-1.7%	+47.1%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p99	163,000 us	165,860 us	118,713 us	-1.7%	+37.3%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	914 tuples/sec	913 tuples/sec	992.33 tuples/sec	+0.1%	-7.9%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.558 MB/s	0.557 MB/s	0.606 MB/s	+0.2%	-7.9%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p50	1,094,077 us	1,095,903 us	1,016,959 us	-0.2%	+7.6%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p95	1,131,739 us	1,144,811 us	1,062,501 us	-1.1%	+6.5%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p99	1,131,739 us	1,144,811 us	1,082,611 us	-1.1%	+4.5%

Raw CSV

config_idx,batch_size,schema_width,string_len,num_batches,total_ms,total_tuples,total_bytes,tuples_per_sec,mb_per_sec,lat_p50_us,lat_p95_us,lat_p99_us
0,10,10,64,20,523.84,200,128000,382,0.233,25261.06,36754.51,36754.51
1,100,10,64,20,2635.60,2000,1280000,759,0.463,129294.80,163000.03,163000.03
2,1000,10,64,20,21887.89,20000,12800000,914,0.558,1094077.47,1131738.99,1131738.99

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 1 out of 1 changed files in this pull request and generated no new comments.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 81.08%. Comparing base (18ebb0d) to head (34cc174).
⚠️ Report is 8 commits behind head on main.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main    #7220      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     81.04%   81.08%   +0.03%     
- Complexity     3968     3989      +21     
============================================
  Files          1162     1160       -2     
  Lines         46259    46145     -114     
  Branches       5153     5135      -18     
============================================
- Hits          37490    37415      -75     
+ Misses         7096     7059      -37     
+ Partials       1673     1671       -2     

Flag	Coverage Δ		*Carryforward flag
access-control-service	70.00% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from ac68ea4
agent-service	77.42% <ø> (-1.08%)	⬇️	Carriedforward from ac68ea4
amber	77.13% <ø> (+0.47%)	⬆️
computing-unit-managing-service	20.49% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from ac68ea4
config-service	65.62% <ø> (-0.36%)	⬇️	Carriedforward from ac68ea4
file-service	66.59% <ø> (-0.22%)	⬇️	Carriedforward from ac68ea4
frontend	83.09% <ø> (-0.14%)	⬇️	Carriedforward from ac68ea4
notebook-migration-service	78.69% <ø> (-0.20%)	⬇️	Carriedforward from ac68ea4
pyamber	97.36% <ø> (-0.01%)	⬇️	Carriedforward from ac68ea4
workflow-compiling-service	26.31% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from ac68ea4

*This pull request uses carry forward flags. Click here to find out more.

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[mengw15]

LGTM