fix(amber): correct WorkerSpec input port to stop flaky timeouts

[Ma77Ball]

What changes were proposed in this PR?

• WorkerSpec's input-port AssignPortRequest now passes an empty storageUris (List()) matching its empty partitionings, satisfying InputManager.addPort's size invariant, so the input port registers and the three worker tests pass deterministically.
• AsyncRPCServer.invokeMethod now re-throws Errors (e.g. failed assertions) after replying to the sender, instead of swallowing them; normal Exceptions are still returned to the sender unchanged, so genuine invariant violations surface loudly rather than degrading into flaky timeouts.

Any related issues, documentation, discussions?

Closes: #6036

How was this PR tested?

• Run sbt "WorkflowExecutionService/testOnly *WorkerSpec"; expect Tests: succeeded 3, failed 0.
• Diagnostic: grep the run log for assertion failed. Before this fix the count is 3 (the assertion fired and was swallowed every run); after it is 0. Verified locally under Java 17.
• The full amber suite is heavy and flaky to run locally, so the engine-wide AsyncRPCServer change is left to the amber CI job to exercise across all RPC handlers.

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

Co-authored with Claude Opus 4.8 in compliance with ASF

[github-actions]

Automated Reviewer Suggestions

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

• Contributors with relevant context: @Yicong-Huang
  You can notify them by mentioning @Yicong-Huang in a comment.

[github-actions]

⚠️ Benchmark changes need a look

🟢 2 better · 🔴 4 worse · ⚪ 9 noise (<±5%) · 0 without baseline

Compared against main 1073b22 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	373	0.228	26,220/36,930/36,930 us	🔴 +9.0% / 🔴 +145.1%
🔴	bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	784	0.478	127,638/151,215/151,215 us	🔴 +5.1% / 🔴 +40.5%
🟢	bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	919	0.561	1,092,826/1,125,265/1,125,265 us	🟢 -7.4% / 🔴 +10.7%

Baseline details

Latest main 1073b22 from same runner

config	metric	PR	latest main	7d avg	Δ latest	Δ 7d
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	373 tuples/sec	408 tuples/sec	777.62 tuples/sec	-8.6%	-52.0%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.228 MB/s	0.249 MB/s	0.475 MB/s	-8.4%	-52.0%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p50	26,220 us	24,060 us	12,612 us	+9.0%	+107.9%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p95	36,930 us	37,749 us	15,070 us	-2.2%	+145.1%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p99	36,930 us	37,749 us	18,360 us	-2.2%	+101.1%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	784 tuples/sec	799 tuples/sec	988.31 tuples/sec	-1.9%	-20.7%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.478 MB/s	0.488 MB/s	0.603 MB/s	-2.0%	-20.8%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p50	127,638 us	121,435 us	101,066 us	+5.1%	+26.3%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p95	151,215 us	154,061 us	107,594 us	-1.8%	+40.5%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p99	151,215 us	154,061 us	115,830 us	-1.8%	+30.5%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	919 tuples/sec	918 tuples/sec	1,019 tuples/sec	+0.1%	-9.9%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.561 MB/s	0.56 MB/s	0.622 MB/s	+0.2%	-9.8%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p50	1,092,826 us	1,085,200 us	986,982 us	+0.7%	+10.7%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p95	1,125,265 us	1,215,807 us	1,028,491 us	-7.4%	+9.4%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p99	1,125,265 us	1,215,807 us	1,058,493 us	-7.4%	+6.3%

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
0,10,10,64,20,535.81,200,128000,373,0.228,26219.98,36930.48,36930.48
1,100,10,64,20,2551.66,2000,1280000,784,0.478,127637.86,151214.59,151214.59
2,1000,10,64,20,21772.61,20000,12800000,919,0.561,1092826.24,1125264.82,1125264.82

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 0% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 55.37%. Comparing base (c3161f7) to head (12c1107).
⚠️ Report is 67 commits behind head on main.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...exera/amber/engine/common/rpc/AsyncRPCServer.scala	0.00%	0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main    #6037      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     54.50%   55.37%   +0.86%     
- Complexity     2915     3002      +87     
============================================
  Files          1108     1111       +3     
  Lines         42807    42914     +107     
  Branches       4604     4614      +10     
============================================
+ Hits          23332    23763     +431     
+ Misses        18119    17762     -357     
- Partials       1356     1389      +33     

Flag	Coverage Δ		*Carryforward flag
access-control-service	70.44% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 4485492
agent-service	34.36% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 4485492
amber	58.73% <0.00%> (+2.21%)	⬆️
computing-unit-managing-service	1.65% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 4485492
config-service	57.35% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 4485492
file-service	58.59% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 4485492
frontend	48.27% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 4485492
pyamber	90.20% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 4485492
python	90.76% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 4485492
workflow-compiling-service	58.69% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 4485492

*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.