Add begin/end_transaction methods in FlightSqlServiceClient

[lewiszlw]

Which issue does this PR close?

Closes #.

Rationale for this change

FlightSqlService suppots transaction feature, so add some helper methods for client.

What changes are included in this PR?

Are there any user-facing changes?

[alamb]

Looks good to me -- thank you @lewiszlw

Could you please add basic integration tests for this code (that shows the data correctly making it from the client to the server)?

I think an example of such a test is here.

arrow-rs/arrow-flight/tests/client.rs

Lines 46 to 70 in eb2d00b

	#[tokio::test]
	async fn test_handshake() {
	do_test(|test_server, mut client| async move {
	client.add_header("foo-header", "bar-header-value").unwrap();
	let request_payload = Bytes::from("foo-request-payload");
	let response_payload = Bytes::from("bar-response-payload");
	let request = HandshakeRequest {
	payload: request_payload.clone(),
	protocol_version: 0,
	};
	let response = HandshakeResponse {
	payload: response_payload.clone(),
	protocol_version: 0,
	};
	test_server.set_handshake_response(Ok(response));
	let response = client.handshake(request_payload).await.unwrap();
	assert_eq!(response, response_payload);
	assert_eq!(test_server.take_handshake_request(), Some(request));
	ensure_metadata(&client, &test_server);
	})
	.await;
	}

Though that looks like it is only for FlightServiceClient rather than the FlightSqlServiceClient 🤔

[alamb]

I was wondering if there were any parameters that should be passed to this function, but I see the underlying message doesn't have any either so this makes sense to me

[lewiszlw]

I added a test in flight_sql_client_cli.rs. (maybe could move to a new file flight_sql_client.rs)

[alamb]

I added a test in flight_sql_client_cli.rs. (maybe could move to a new file flight_sql_client.rs)

Yeah, it seems like flight_sql_client_cli.rs is slowly becoming the test for the FlightSqlServiceClient -- I agree reaming it and starting to cover all the FlightSQL methods might be good

[alamb]

Thanks @lewiszlw

[alamb]

this all have default impls, so it is ok to remove them, right?

[lewiszlw]

Yes.

[alamb]

Thanks again @lewiszlw