Fix optimistic concurrency issue with read model projections

[MarcAstr0]

Description

The provider libraries have two methods for read model retrieval: fetch and search. In the implementation for the Azure provider, only the former was adding an optimisticConcurrencyValue property to the boosterMetadata. This value stores the Cosmos DB _etag property for the document and is used to handle optimistic concurrency scenarios.

Read model projection issues related to optimistic concurrency have been found due to the search method being used instead of fetch. Some read models weren't properly projected when a simultaneous update occurred because the optimistic concurrency verification wasn't happening due to the optimisticConcurrencyValue property not being in the boosterMetadata.

This PR fixes this by including this property in the search method implementation results.

Changes

• Modified the Azure provider's read model search method so that it writes the _etag as the optimisticConcurrencyValue in the boosterMetadata.

Checks

• Project Builds
• Project passes tests and checks
• Updated documentation accordingly

[MarcAstr0]

/integration sha=2e73191c62c9e35131e2bf1d389b1bfe6af6b7a8

[what-the-diff]

PR Summary

• Introduction of a New Change Log File
  A new file that records changes (referred to as a change log) was added. This change log is specifically for noting updates to a software package named @boostercloud/framework-core. The latest update resolves an issue with too much confidence in the consistency of certain data projections in the read model.

• Upgrade to Resource Mapping in 'query-helper.ts' File
  Modifications were made to a file called query-helper.ts. These changes are aimed at better mapping of resources by inserting a new property called optimisticConcurrencyValue to the boosterMetadata object. To accomplish this, the _etag (which is an identifier used for managing updates to resources) of each resource was utilized.

[github-actions]

⌛ Integration tests are running...

Check their status here 👈

[github-actions]

✅ Integration tests have finished successfully!

[davidverdu]

LGTM