Ability to bulk create Users

[bsekar]

This change implements the ability to bulk create users, POST /Users/tx

[cfdreddbot]

Hey bsekar!

Thanks for submitting this pull request! I'm here to inform the recipients of the pull request that you and the commit authors have already signed the CLA.

[cf-gitbot]

We have created an issue in Pivotal Tracker to manage this:

https://www.pivotaltracker.com/story/show/149535983

The labels on this github issue will be updated when the story is started.

[coveralls]

Coverage decreased (-21.3%) to 65.146% when pulling 0601dfb on GESoftware-CF:feature/batch_users into 763cf32 on cloudfoundry:develop.

[coveralls]

Coverage decreased (-21.3%) to 65.146% when pulling 0601dfb on GESoftware-CF:feature/batch_users into 763cf32 on cloudfoundry:develop.

[coveralls]

Coverage decreased (-0.09%) to 86.381% when pulling f19d864 on GESoftware-CF:feature/batch_users into 763cf32 on cloudfoundry:develop.

[coveralls]

Coverage decreased (-0.09%) to 86.381% when pulling f19d864 on GESoftware-CF:feature/batch_users into 763cf32 on cloudfoundry:develop.

[coveralls]

Coverage decreased (-0.09%) to 86.381% when pulling f19d864 on GESoftware-CF:feature/batch_users into 763cf32 on cloudfoundry:develop.

[coveralls]

Coverage decreased (-0.08%) to 86.4% when pulling f19d864 on GESoftware-CF:feature/batch_users into 763cf32 on cloudfoundry:develop.

[bsekar]

This PR has caused a rather interesting failure on Postgres. @transactional with Postgres would mean that it initiates rollback as soon as a SQL failure happens. This method always causes SQL Exception during user creation, though it is suppressed in try catch. Therefore Postgres @transactional is not possible with this change in its current state. I'm still working on fixing this

[coveralls]

Coverage increased (+0.008%) to 86.459% when pulling 9ec5588 on GESoftware-CF:feature/batch_users into 6672765 on cloudfoundry:develop.

[coveralls]

Coverage increased (+0.008%) to 86.459% when pulling 9ec5588 on GESoftware-CF:feature/batch_users into 6672765 on cloudfoundry:develop.

[coveralls]

Coverage increased (+0.008%) to 86.459% when pulling 9ec5588 on GESoftware-CF:feature/batch_users into 6672765 on cloudfoundry:develop.

[bsekar]

@tnwang Can you please provide an update on this PR?

[tnwang]

Our developers took a look and passed along this note:

Use-case valid. SCIM defines Bulk endpoint but proposed implementation is proprietary.

I'll ask them to provide more details.

[tnwang]

I spoke with our dojo members from SAP, and they noted that the SCIM specification defines the optional endpoint bulk, which allows to bundle all kinds of SCIM operations in a single request. Bulk creation of users would be one use-case for this, but it also supports e.g. deletion and operations for groups. It is defined in the spec here: http://www.simplecloud.info/specs/draft-scim-api-01.html#bulk-resources

The proposal would be to adopt this change to conform to the SCIM specification. As the endpoint is optional, in our eyes it would be ok to start with only partly implementing this endpoint (i.e. implement only the create action for users), but conform to the spec.

SAP would also welcome that endpoint, especially the group operations. By starting to implement the specified endpoint, it would be easy to extend it with other operations and still be standards conformant. Otherwise we could in the worst case end up with two different proprietary endpoints or one proprietary (if the PR is accepted) and another one according to the SCIM standard (when it is implemented).

[sreetummidi]

Closing as we don't plan on supporting this flow.