feat(lambda-event-sources): starting position timestamp for kafka

[nikovirtala]

Issue # (if applicable)

Closes #31808

Reason for this change

It was impossible to start consuming a Kafka topic from a specific point in time.

Description of changes

The user may now set startingPositionTimestamp to ManagedKafkaEventSource and SelfManagedKafkaEventSource to start consuming a Kafka topic from a specific point in time.

Lambda and CloudFormation have supported the functionality for a while, and other stream event sources like KinesisEventSource already had a CDK implementation for it. So, technically, this change is doing nothing new; it is only repeating the pattern that has already been proven to work on other sources.

Description of how you validated changes

The change is tested by adding similar unit tests to other event sources supporting this functionality.

Checklist

• My code adheres to the CONTRIBUTING GUIDE and DESIGN GUIDELINES

---

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache-2.0 license

[moelasmar]

could you please add a new GH issue as a Feature request, and link it to this issue.

[moelasmar]

IMO, this is a feature and not a chore, and it needs update in Readme, and new integration test case

[sumupitchayan]

Agreed with @moelasmar, this seems like a feat to me - @nikovirtala can you please add an integ test and README documentation on this?

[aws-cdk-automation]

This PR has been in the CHANGES REQUESTED state for 3 weeks, and looks abandoned. To keep this PR from being closed, please continue work on it. If not, it will automatically be closed in a week.

[aws-cdk-automation]

The pull request linter has failed. See the aws-cdk-automation comment below for failure reasons. If you believe this pull request should receive an exemption, please comment and provide a justification.

A comment requesting an exemption should contain the text Exemption Request. Additionally, if clarification is needed add Clarification Request to a comment.

[nikovirtala]

Agreed with @moelasmar, this seems like a feat to me - @nikovirtala can you please add an integ test and README documentation on this?

README is clear, but creating the integration test for this is a lot of work:

1) there are no existing integration tests for any other Event Source Mappings
2) testing asserting Kafka Event Source Mapping requires creating an MSK cluster or such, which is not as trivial as creating a simple resource like DynamoDB Table (I hope there is something I can borrow from the MSK module, if one exist)

[nikovirtala]

Exemption Request

2. testing Kafka Event Source Mapping requires creating an MSK cluster or such, which is not as trivial as creating a simple resource like DynamoDB Table (I hope there is something I can borrow from the MSK module, if one exist)

Ok, the MSK module is in alpha state, and even that doesn't have an integration test that would create a topic and messages to the topic — which would be required to test this feature 😞

I doubt that creating all that is too much for me.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 82.38%. Comparing base (7c1870f) to head (129d236).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main   #31439   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   82.38%   82.38%           
=======================================
  Files         120      120           
  Lines        6955     6955           
  Branches     1173     1173           
=======================================
  Hits         5730     5730           
  Misses       1120     1120           
  Partials      105      105           

Flag	Coverage Δ
suite.unit	82.38% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Components	Coverage Δ
packages/aws-cdk	∅ <ø> (∅)
packages/aws-cdk-lib/core	82.38% <ø> (ø)

🚀 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.

[nikovirtala]

It seems there are zero integration tests in this module. So, can anyone change this module before there is one? 🤔

✅ Updated pull request passes all PRLinter validations. Dismissing previous PRLinter review.

[shikha372]

Thank you @nikovirtala for contributing this PR, please let us know if you're still interested continue with this feature implementation, to prevent auto closure.

Pull request has been modified.

[nikovirtala]

Thank you @nikovirtala for contributing this PR, please let us know if you're still interested continue with this feature implementation, to prevent auto closure.

I have a lot of interest in getting this feature available but I don't know if I have time to deal with the constantly changing "requirements" from changing reviewers — it should be enough to get things merged if currently used conventions are followed.

[shikha372]

Thank you @nikovirtala for your contribution, all comments are addressed now, will work on getting this merged in.

[mergify]

Thank you for contributing! Your pull request will be updated from main and then merged automatically (do not update manually, and be sure to allow changes to be pushed to your fork).

[aws-cdk-automation]

AWS CodeBuild CI Report

• CodeBuild project: AutoBuildv2Project1C6BFA3F-wQm2hXv2jqQv
• Commit ID: 129d236
• Result: SUCCEEDED
• Build Logs (available for 30 days)

Powered by github-codebuild-logs, available on the AWS Serverless Application Repository

[mergify]

Thank you for contributing! Your pull request will be updated from main and then merged automatically (do not update manually, and be sure to allow changes to be pushed to your fork).

[github-actions]

Comments on closed issues and PRs are hard for our team to see.
If you need help, please open a new issue that references this one.