[#noissue] Handle ByteString annotation values of protobuf

[kojandy]

Since bytes in protobuf model corresponds to com.google.protobuf.ByteString instead of byte[] in Java, I've added logic to convert ByteString to byte[] when ByteString-typed annotation value is received.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #9705 (9e655c2) into master (3702da1) will increase coverage by 0.09%.
The diff coverage is 0.00%.

❗ Current head 9e655c2 differs from pull request most recent head 6dd9f90. Consider uploading reports for the commit 6dd9f90 to get more accurate results

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master    #9705      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     38.75%   38.84%   +0.09%     
+ Complexity    11918    11901      -17     
============================================
  Files          3510     3538      +28     
  Lines         94258    93975     -283     
  Branches      10591    10494      -97     
============================================
- Hits          36529    36507      -22     
+ Misses        54553    54293     -260     
+ Partials       3176     3175       -1     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
...p/pinpoint/common/server/bo/AnnotationFactory.java	28.12% <ø> (ø)
...t/common/server/bo/grpc/GrpcAnnotationHandler.java	11.53% <0.00%> (-0.47%)	⬇️

... and 382 files with indirect coverage changes

[CLAassistant]

All committers have signed the CLA.

[smilu97]

I'm sorry that I didn't realized it last time, but I'm not sure if it's ok to make AnnotationFactory grpc-dependent...?

I think we can make another GrpcAnnotationFactory which extends AnnotationFactory, and use it in GrpcSpanBinder

I found we already have GrpcAnnotationHandler::buildCustomAnnotationValue.

[kojandy]

Yup, as @emeroad already pointed it out on last weekly meeting, I will move relating-logic to the location you've suggested. and I guess this PR won't be merged until 2.6.0 release when the actual use of the type bytes in protobuf model is introduced, right? Or can I merge this PR regardless of the milestone label?

[smilu97]

I didn't catch that conversation was about this XD

Anyway, the milestone labels are maybe just for some summarizing stuffs like release note, and pointing out the features related to those commits are experimental. I think it is totally fine to merge some branches now, and do some experiments on the dev cluster

[kojandy]

Oh, I see. Thank you for the guideline. I will fix it right away then!

[smilu97]

Sorry for misguiding.

Setting milestone means the PR requires to be merged after the version exactly as you said.