Fix overflow bugs in backoff strategy.

[Quanzzzz]

Fixed issue #1453 based on the proposed fix code provided by OlegZhukov, set up ceils for baseDelay, maxBackoffTime and retriesAttempted to prevent potential overflow problems.

Description

Added three ceils for baseDelay, maxBackoffTime and retriesAttempted respectively. Restricted the exponentialDelayMillis from overflow via applying these ceils in calculation. Added unit tests for EqualJitterBackoffStrategy.java based on proposed test cases provided by OlegZhukov.
In addition, to make it easier to compare different Duration objects, two functions min and max are added in NumericUtils.java, corresponding tests are added too.

Motivation and Context

Before this modification, the exponentialDelay has a risk of overflow due to its type as Integer. Besides, baseDelay and maxBackoffTime are not checked if they will meet overflow problems while converting into Millis. So to fix these potential problems, we need to add some restrictions on these variables, as well as the calculation.

The open issue corresponding to this pull request is: #1453 .

Testing

Two new test classes are added in this pull request. One is the test class for EqualJitterBackoffStrategyTest.java, which includes unit tests for different values of baseDelay and maxBackoffTime. The other is for NumericUtils.java, testing whether the compare functions work well in different situations.

Screenshots (if appropriate)

Types of changes

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)

Checklist

• I have read the CONTRIBUTING document
• Local run of mvn install succeeds
• My code follows the code style of this project
• My change requires a change to the Javadoc documentation
• I have updated the Javadoc documentation accordingly
• I have read the README document
• I have added tests to cover my changes
• All new and existing tests passed
• A short description of the change has been added to the CHANGELOG
• My change is to implement 1.11 parity feature and I have updated LaunchChangelog

License

• I confirm that this pull request can be released under the Apache 2 license

[codecov-io]

Codecov Report

Merging #1673 into master will decrease coverage by <.01%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master    #1673      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     74.48%   74.48%   -0.01%     
  Complexity      909      909              
============================================
  Files           960      960              
  Lines         30376    30316      -60     
  Branches       2390     2371      -19     
============================================
- Hits          22626    22580      -46     
+ Misses         6615     6598      -17     
- Partials       1135     1138       +3

Flag	Coverage Δ	Complexity Δ
#unittests	74.48% <ø> (-0.01%)	909 <ø> (ø)

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ	Complexity Δ
.../awssdk/http/apache/internal/net/SdkSslSocket.java	36.36% <0%> (-22.73%)	0% <0%> (ø)
...nio/netty/internal/OldConnectionReaperHandler.java	81.81% <0%> (-9.1%)	0% <0%> (ø)
...mazon/awssdk/core/internal/retry/RetryHandler.java	93.18% <0%> (-2.28%)	0% <0%> (ø)
...ery/internal/marshall/QueryMarshallerRegistry.java	77.77% <0%> (-2.23%)	0% <0%> (ø)
...awssdk/codegen/poet/client/specs/ProtocolSpec.java	81.57% <0%> (-2.15%)	0% <0%> (ø)
.../amazon/awssdk/http/apache/ProxyConfiguration.java	49.03% <0%> (-0.97%)	0% <0%> (ø)
...signer/internal/AwsChunkedEncodingInputStream.java	46.62% <0%> (-0.68%)	0% <0%> (ø)
...internal/client/DefaultDynamoDbEnhancedClient.java	65.38% <0%> (-0.66%)	13% <0%> (ø)
...ternal/marshall/JsonProtocolMarshallerBuilder.java	92.3% <0%> (-0.55%)	0% <0%> (ø)
...awssdk/regions/internal/util/EC2MetadataUtils.java	38.2% <0%> (-0.3%)	0% <0%> (ø)
... and 33 more

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update cc88c19...ee4a458. Read the comment docs.

[spfink]

Note in the future if you update branch through GitHub you don't need to rebase the commit locally. Please make sure the other files are not actually being modified before merging

[sonarqubecloud]

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!

0 Bugs
0 Vulnerabilities (and 2 Security Hotspots to review)
1 Code Smell

No Coverage information
No Duplication information