feat: add new option for bulk gets in KV

[teresalves]

Creating a new part in the binding for new bulk gets, along with tests for regular gets and the bulk gets
We consider we have a POST endpoint in SGW and we send the keys in a json format as such:

{
   "keys": ["key1", "key2"]
}

However, we decided that the binding here will only be a passthrough and everything will processed in the endpoint. On top of that, since everything is processed in the binding and comes as a single response, we don't need extra logic to process metadata, we just need to make sure that the binding responds what we what. Because of these two things, we added two more parameters in the request body:

{
   "keys": ["key1", "key2"],
   "type": "text",
   "withMetadata": true
}

We added tests for:
Regular gets:

• 400s
• 500s
• 200s with text, json, stream and arrayBuffer

Bulk Gets:

• 500s
• 200s with text and json, as these will be the only supported types for now.

Note that we do not test for 400s because we will not have them. If none of the keys exist, we return a 200 but with empty values. Example:

{
   "key1": null,
   "key2": null,
 }

[github-actions]

All contributors have signed the CLA ✍️ ✅
_{Posted by the CLA Assistant Lite bot.}

[teresalves]

I have read the CLA Document and I hereby sign the CLA

[teresalves]

recheck

[sesteves]

Good work! Left some comments with suggestions to improve tests.

[sesteves]

nit - any particular reason for doing this in stream, instead of just doing request.arrayBuffer()

[teresalves]

Tried some other ways and it was not reading the stream properly. Both here and in the type "stream" test below.

[jasnell]

Can you expand on what "not reading the stream properly" means? ;-)

Also... you can do the following to simplify this a bit:

for await (const chunk of request.body) {
  r += decoder.decode(value, { stream: true });
}
// But also remember to grab the final buffered chunk if any.
r += decoder.decode();

[teresalves]

I did not try this one in particular. Added it, thank you!

[jasnell]

fwiw, We have Response.error() now that would end up sending a 500 response back to the eyeball.

[teresalves]

Tried this one but the error message would be more generic and less specific to our particular case, so I would rather keep it like it is, if that's ok.

[jasnell]

If the expectation is that the env.KV.get promise will reject, use

await assert.rejects(env.KV.get('fail-server'), {
  message: '... whatever the expected error message is',
});

[teresalves]

This is so much cleaner. Thanks a bunch!
And thanks for all the suggestions :)

[jasnell]

Suggested change

	let result = "";
	while (true) {
	const { done, value } = await reader.read();
	if (done) break;
	result += decoder.decode(value, { stream: true });
	}
	let result = "";
	for await (const chunk of response) {
	result += decoder.decode(value, { stream: true });
	}
	result += decoder.decode();

[jasnell]

Be sure to check the linting. Looks like the indentation on a few of these is out of whack.

[teresalves]

That line in particular was already here, but I agree that it seems generally funky. Tried to adjust it a bit. Is there a linter I can run on top of this?
Thank you!