test(amber): move state-mat e2e into amber-integration

[Yicong-Huang]

What changes were proposed in this PR?

Drops the macOS-only pyamber-state-materialization-mac diagnostic job and the sqlite-backed SqlCatalog override it relied on. The two state-materialization e2e tests now run under the existing amber-integration ubuntu job, which already provisions postgres + iceberg catalog DB + MinIO + Lakekeeper and runs pytest -m integration as its last step.

Concretely:

Before	After
pyamber-state-materialization-mac macOS job (build.yml:742)	deleted
SqlCatalog (sqlite) injected in module fixture	real postgres-backed JdbcCatalog, matching test_iceberg_document.py:45
Test discovered by an explicit pytest -sv <path> from that job	@pytest.mark.integration + picked up by amber-integration's pytest -m integration

StorageConfig.initialize is wrapped in a session-autouse fixture (rather than called at module import time) so it co-exists with test_iceberg_document.py's import-time initialize regardless of pytest collection order.

The unit-style test_process_start_channel_persists_produce_state_on_start_output that the mac job also ran is untouched: it monkeypatches the output manager and is already picked up by the regular pyamber job's pytest -m "not integration" step.

Any related issues, documentation, discussions?

Closes #5681.

How was this PR tested?

Locally against the existing texera-dev infra (postgres on 5432 with texera_iceberg_catalog schema initialized via sql/iceberg_postgres_catalog.sql):

cd amber && pytest -m integration --junit-xml=/tmp/junit-integration.xml -sv
# 3 passed, 502 deselected  -- test_state_written_by_output_manager_is_replayed_by_reader,
#                              test_state_table_persists_across_writer_close,
#                              test_rest_catalog_round_trip

And the regular pyamber suite still green:

cd amber && pytest -m "not integration" -q
# 502 passed, 3 deselected

In CI, the amber-integration job picks these tests up automatically because they're marked @pytest.mark.integration. The mac job is gone so PRs no longer pay for a separate macOS runner just for these two tests.

Was this PR authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?

Generated-by: Claude Code (Claude Opus 4.7)

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 52.74%. Comparing base (99b9ca2) to head (65f71c3).
⚠️ Report is 7 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main    #5682      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     53.09%   52.74%   -0.35%     
+ Complexity     2546     2543       -3     
============================================
  Files          1076     1090      +14     
  Lines         41762    42150     +388     
  Branches       4513     4529      +16     
============================================
+ Hits          22174    22233      +59     
- Misses        18278    18592     +314     
- Partials       1310     1325      +15     

Flag	Coverage Δ		*Carryforward flag
access-control-service	71.42% <ø> (ø)
agent-service	34.36% <ø> (ø)
amber	52.67% <ø> (-1.28%)	⬇️	Carriedforward from 55f0fca
computing-unit-managing-service	1.65% <ø> (ø)
config-service	56.71% <ø> (ø)
file-service	57.06% <ø> (ø)
frontend	47.86% <ø> (+0.34%)	⬆️	Carriedforward from 55f0fca
pyamber	89.76% <ø> (-0.97%)	⬇️
python	90.74% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 55f0fca
workflow-compiling-service	58.69% <ø> (ø)

*This pull request uses carry forward flags. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[github-actions]

✅ No material benchmark regressions detected

🟢 13 better · 🔴 0 worse · ⚪ 2 noise (<±5%) · 0 without baseline

CI benchmark results are noisy; treat <±5% as noise unless repeated.

Dashboard · Run

	config	throughput	MB/s	latency	max Δ latest / 7d
🟢	bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	451	0.275	22,208/29,682/29,682 us	🟢 -15.0% / 🟢 -15.6%
🟢	bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	947	0.578	106,608/137,775/137,775 us	🟢 +13.6% / 🟢 +5.8%
🟢	bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	1,124	0.686	889,964/953,406/953,406 us	🟢 +17.9% / 🟢 -8.2%

Baseline details

Latest main a044287 from 2026-06-13T22:20:02.070Z

config	metric	PR	latest main	7d avg	Δ latest	Δ 7d
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	451 tuples/sec	395.36 tuples/sec	410.7 tuples/sec	+14.1%	+9.8%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.275 MB/s	0.241 MB/s	0.251 MB/s	+14.0%	+9.7%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p50	22,208 us	24,519 us	23,798 us	-9.4%	-6.7%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p95	29,682 us	34,935 us	35,169 us	-15.0%	-15.6%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p99	29,682 us	34,935 us	35,169 us	-15.0%	-15.6%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	947 tuples/sec	833.83 tuples/sec	894.84 tuples/sec	+13.6%	+5.8%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.578 MB/s	0.509 MB/s	0.546 MB/s	+13.6%	+5.8%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p50	106,608 us	120,315 us	111,887 us	-11.4%	-4.7%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p95	137,775 us	145,017 us	139,602 us	-5.0%	-1.3%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p99	137,775 us	145,017 us	139,602 us	-5.0%	-1.3%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	1,124 tuples/sec	953.24 tuples/sec	1,045 tuples/sec	+17.9%	+7.6%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.686 MB/s	0.582 MB/s	0.638 MB/s	+17.9%	+7.6%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p50	889,964 us	1,052,108 us	969,370 us	-15.4%	-8.2%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p95	953,406 us	1,094,010 us	1,019,271 us	-12.9%	-6.5%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p99	953,406 us	1,094,010 us	1,019,271 us	-12.9%	-6.5%

Raw CSV

config_idx,batch_size,schema_width,string_len,num_batches,total_ms,total_tuples,total_bytes,tuples_per_sec,mb_per_sec,lat_p50_us,lat_p95_us,lat_p99_us
0,10,10,64,20,443.54,200,128000,451,0.275,22207.79,29681.99,29681.99
1,100,10,64,20,2112.87,2000,1280000,947,0.578,106607.71,137774.55,137774.55
2,1000,10,64,20,17798.41,20000,12800000,1124,0.686,889964.31,953406.43,953406.43

[aglinxinyuan]

The change is correct. I will review it after the CI passes.