[improve][admin]internalGetMessageById shouldn't be allowed on partitioned topic

[gaozhangmin]

Motivation

Now, if a topic without partition index provided when querying internalGetMessageById, error Topic not found will be thrown out. It will confuse users.

We'd better forbidden internalGetMessageById on partitioned-topic.

Modifications

If a partitioned-topic is provided, Status.METHOD_NOT_ALLOWED will be thrown out

Verifying this change

• Make sure that the change passes the CI checks.

(Please pick either of the following options)

This change is a trivial rework / code cleanup without any test coverage.

(or)

This change is already covered by existing tests, such as (please describe tests).

(or)

This change added tests and can be verified as follows:

(example:)

• Added integration tests for end-to-end deployment with large payloads (10MB)
• Extended integration test for recovery after broker failure

Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts:

If the box was checked, please highlight the changes

• Dependencies (add or upgrade a dependency)
• The public API
• The schema
• The default values of configurations
• The threading model
• The binary protocol
• The REST endpoints
• The admin CLI options
• The metrics
• Anything that affects deployment

Documentation

• doc
• doc-required
• doc-not-needed
• doc-complete

Matching PR in forked repository

gaozhangmin#5

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Merging #19013 (866109b) into master (9ec1d07) will decrease coverage by 0.05%.
The diff coverage is 56.25%.

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master   #19013      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     47.73%   47.67%   -0.06%     
- Complexity    10819    10825       +6     
============================================
  Files           712      712              
  Lines         69645    69650       +5     
  Branches       7481     7480       -1     
============================================
- Hits          33242    33203      -39     
- Misses        32699    32758      +59     
+ Partials       3704     3689      -15     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	47.67% <56.25%> (-0.06%)	⬇️

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

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
...pache/pulsar/broker/admin/v1/PersistentTopics.java	47.09% <0.00%> (-0.28%)	⬇️
...pulsar/broker/admin/impl/PersistentTopicsBase.java	59.47% <63.33%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
...pache/pulsar/broker/admin/v2/PersistentTopics.java	74.80% <88.88%> (+0.39%)	⬆️
...java/org/apache/pulsar/proxy/stats/TopicStats.java	58.82% <0.00%> (-41.18%)	⬇️
...lsar/broker/loadbalance/impl/ThresholdShedder.java	3.27% <0.00%> (-27.05%)	⬇️
...org/apache/pulsar/broker/loadbalance/LoadData.java	58.33% <0.00%> (-8.34%)	⬇️
...roker/loadbalance/impl/ModularLoadManagerImpl.java	65.39% <0.00%> (-3.50%)	⬇️
...a/org/apache/pulsar/proxy/server/ProxyService.java	80.00% <0.00%> (-0.94%)	⬇️
...rg/apache/pulsar/compaction/TwoPhaseCompactor.java	72.81% <0.00%> (-0.93%)	⬇️
...sar/broker/loadbalance/impl/LoadManagerShared.java	45.17% <0.00%> (-0.88%)	⬇️
... and 21 more

[congbobo184]

could you please add the test for it?

[liangyepianzhou]

Overall right, and it is better if you can add a unit test to verify it.

[poorbarcode]

could you please add the test for it?

+1

[gaozhangmin]

could you please add the test for it?

+1

org.apache.pulsar.broker.admin.PersistentTopicsTest#testGetMessageById