feat: require a warehouse for every execution while the feature is enabled

[mengw15]

Stacked PR — based on #7536 (feat/6933-warehouse-frontend), not on main. That branch adds the warehouse picker this change reads from, so the diff and file list here include its commits; only the top commit belongs to this PR. Please review/merge #7536 first — this is a draft until it lands, after which the diff collapses to just the change described below.

What changes were proposed in this PR?

With per-user warehouses enabled, an execution carrying no warehouseId silently wrote into the shared default warehouse: WorkflowService.resolveWarehouseName mapped None to None whenever the flag was on. So "a run writes into the user's own warehouse" was a UI convention rather than a system property — and one path already violated it: SyncExecutionResource hardcoded warehouseId = None, so on a deployment with the feature on, every agent-driven execution landed in the shared warehouse.

The fix makes the pick required the same way a computing unit already is, and carries it along the same path the computing unit already travels:

• WorkflowService.resolveWarehouseName rejects instead of falling back: with the flag on and nothing picked, the execution fails rather than being routed into shared storage. The websocket path needs nothing more — the UI always sends its pick.
• SyncExecutionRequest gains warehouseId and the endpoint forwards it instead of hardcoding None.
• agent-service threads warehouseId through ExecutionConfig and the delegate config into that request body, mirroring computingUnitId line for line.
• The frontend sends the warehouse the user picked when creating an agent, right where it already sends the selected computing unit (agent.service.ts).

This is not a privilege change: an explicit whid was, and still is, checked against the caller's uid. Flag-off behaviour is unchanged — an explicit pick is still refused loudly (#6930), and no pick still means the shared warehouse.

Worth settling while the flag is off everywhere: tightening this later, once a deployment runs with the lenient fallback, would break callers that work today.

Any related issues, documentation, discussions?

Closes #7751. Part of #6870, follow-up to #6932. Stacked on #7536 (warehouse picker).

How was this PR tested?

• Backend: WorkflowServiceWarehouseSpec's contract case flips from "no pick keeps the shared warehouse" to "no pick is refused while enabled", with the flag-off fallback kept as its own case. WorkflowServiceWarehouseSpec + SyncExecutionResourceSpec run locally: 38/38 passed; WorkflowExecutionService/scalafmtCheck (main + Test) passes.
• agent-service: tsc --noEmit passes and bun test workflow-execution-tools.spec.ts is 23 pass / 0 fail.
• Frontend: agent.service.spec.ts gains a WarehouseService stub mirroring the existing computing-unit stub, asserting the payload carries the selected warehouseId and omits it when nothing is selected; ng test --include=... passes.

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

Generated-by: Claude Code (claude-opus-4-8)

[github-actions]

Automated Reviewer Suggestions

Based on the git blame history of the changed files, we recommend the following reviewers:

• Contributors with relevant context: @Neilk1021, @aglinxinyuan, @bobbai00
  You can notify them by mentioning @Neilk1021, @aglinxinyuan, @bobbai00 in a comment.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 96.33333% with 11 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 90.94%. Comparing base (12169c2) to head (2727aa5).
⚠️ Report is 43 commits behind head on main.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...create-modal/warehouse-create-modal.component.html	77.77%	4 Missing ⚠️
.../user/user-warehouse/user-warehouse.component.html	89.28%	3 Missing ⚠️
...wer-button/computing-unit-selection.component.html	92.68%	3 Missing ⚠️
...power-button/computing-unit-selection.component.ts	97.77%	0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main    #7752      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     89.65%   90.94%   +1.28%     
- Complexity     4397     4448      +51     
============================================
  Files          1177     1183       +6     
  Lines         46996    47428     +432     
  Branches       5268     5306      +38     
============================================
+ Hits          42136    43133     +997     
+ Misses         3094     2616     -478     
+ Partials       1766     1679      -87     

Flag	Coverage Δ		*Carryforward flag
access-control-service	70.00% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 94c35f4
agent-service	98.62% <ø> (-0.01%)	⬇️	Carriedforward from 94c35f4
amber	87.46% <100.00%> (+1.10%)	⬆️
computing-unit-managing-service	72.46% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 94c35f4
config-service	77.31% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 94c35f4
file-service	68.90% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 94c35f4
frontend	92.64% <96.25%> (+1.97%)	⬆️
notebook-migration-service	78.89% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 94c35f4
pyamber	97.57% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 94c35f4
workflow-compiling-service	57.89% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 94c35f4

*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]

⚠️ Benchmark changes need a look

🟢 0 better · 🔴 7 worse · ⚪ 8 noise (<±5%) · 0 without baseline

Compared against main 60300e3 benchmarked on this same runner, so the delta is largely free of cross-runner hardware noise. The "7d avg" column still reflects the gh-pages dashboard. Treat <±5% as noise unless repeated.

Dashboard · Run

	config	throughput	MB/s	latency	max Δ latest / 7d
🔴	bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	383	0.234	25,016/36,384/36,384 us	🔴 +20.1% / 🔴 +127.6%
🔴	bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	870	0.531	108,428/176,474/176,474 us	🔴 +47.0% / 🔴 +64.5%
⚪	bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	1,068	0.652	933,296/1,024,407/1,024,407 us	⚪ within ±5% / ⚪ within ±5%

Baseline details

Latest main 60300e3 from same runner

config	metric	PR	latest main	7d avg	Δ latest	Δ 7d
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	383 tuples/sec	431 tuples/sec	779.07 tuples/sec	-11.1%	-50.8%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.234 MB/s	0.263 MB/s	0.476 MB/s	-11.0%	-50.8%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p50	25,016 us	20,833 us	12,818 us	+20.1%	+95.2%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p95	36,384 us	35,917 us	15,986 us	+1.3%	+127.6%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p99	36,384 us	35,917 us	19,339 us	+1.3%	+88.1%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	870 tuples/sec	966 tuples/sec	1,011 tuples/sec	-9.9%	-14.0%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.531 MB/s	0.59 MB/s	0.617 MB/s	-10.0%	-14.0%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p50	108,428 us	104,259 us	100,965 us	+4.0%	+7.4%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p95	176,474 us	120,021 us	107,295 us	+47.0%	+64.5%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p99	176,474 us	120,021 us	115,531 us	+47.0%	+52.8%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	1,068 tuples/sec	1,082 tuples/sec	1,049 tuples/sec	-1.3%	+1.8%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.652 MB/s	0.66 MB/s	0.64 MB/s	-1.2%	+1.9%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p50	933,296 us	912,902 us	978,248 us	+2.2%	-4.6%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p95	1,024,407 us	1,045,784 us	1,021,881 us	-2.0%	+0.2%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p99	1,024,407 us	1,045,784 us	1,050,075 us	-2.0%	-2.4%

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
0,10,10,64,20,521.78,200,128000,383,0.234,25016.47,36383.94,36383.94
1,100,10,64,20,2299.01,2000,1280000,870,0.531,108428.17,176473.83,176473.83
2,1000,10,64,20,18728.94,20000,12800000,1068,0.652,933295.95,1024407.38,1024407.38