enhance: add client interceptor support

[madogar]

No description provided.

[sre-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: madogar
To complete the pull request process, please assign yhmo after the PR has been reviewed.
You can assign the PR to them by writing /assign @yhmo in a comment when ready.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[sre-ci-robot]

Welcome @madogar! It looks like this is your first PR to milvus-io/milvus-sdk-java 🎉

[yhmo]

@madogar
We don't intend to expose direct interceptor input to users.

Java SDK follows the python sdk logic. In python sdk, the interceptor is used to pass db_name and authorization.
https://github.com/milvus-io/pymilvus/blob/3198bd2614446cd3b4266751394d6d16dcb6a8ef/pymilvus/client/grpc_handler.py#L236
https://github.com/milvus-io/pymilvus/blob/3198bd2614446cd3b4266751394d6d16dcb6a8ef/pymilvus/client/grpc_handler.py#L239

The python sdk doesn't provide direct interceptor for users, either. We only expose parameters that we can support.

[madogar]

@yhmo
My bad, forgot to set the context. Here is the server side change to set client_request_id in logs:
milvus-io/milvus#32264

As of today there is no way to set the param from java SDK, hence this change where would implement an interceptor like below and set it at client level:
`public class TraceIdClientInterceptor implements ClientInterceptor {
@OverRide
public <ReqT, RespT> ClientCall<ReqT, RespT> interceptCall(MethodDescriptor<ReqT, RespT> method, CallOptions callOptions, Channel next) {

    return new ForwardingClientCall
        .SimpleForwardingClientCall<ReqT, RespT>(next.newCall(method, callOptions)) {
        @Override
        public void start(ClientCall.Listener<RespT> responseListener, Metadata headers) {
            headers.put(Metadata.Key.of("client_request_id", Metadata.ASCII_STRING_MARSHALLER), "999-" + UUID.randomUUID().toString());
            super.start(responseListener, headers);
        }
    };
}

}`

The biggest challenge is setting this (unique value)param for every gRPC call.

[yhmo]

@madogar
This pr is to set a client ID for the connection, and pass the client ID by ClientInterceptor.
In my opinion, I mean no need to expose ClientInterceptor to users.
Just like the database name:

if (StringUtils.isNotEmpty(connectParam.getDatabaseName())) {
            metadata.put(Metadata.Key.of("dbname", Metadata.ASCII_STRING_MARSHALLER), connectParam.getDatabaseName());
}

List<ClientInterceptor> clientInterceptors = new ArrayList<>();
clientInterceptors.add(MetadataUtils.newAttachHeadersInterceptor(metadata));

We can add a method to the ConnectParam like this:

if (StringUtils.isNotEmpty(connectParam.getClientID())) {
            metadata.put(Metadata.Key.of("client_request_id", Metadata.ASCII_STRING_MARSHALLER), connectParam.getClientID());
}

List<ClientInterceptor> clientInterceptors = new ArrayList<>();
clientInterceptors.add(MetadataUtils.newAttachHeadersInterceptor(metadata));

The ConnectParam.withClientInterceptors() directly exposes the grpc class ClientInterceptor to users, which is not a good design. It might be out of control if users pass ClientInterceptor freely to the server.

Just let the user input an ID by ConnectParam.withClientID(String cliecntID), and internally encapsulate the ID with a ClientInterceptor.