O3-5145: Add uniqueness constraints for billable service fields

[UjjawalPrabhat]

Summary

This PR implements server-side validation to ensure the uniqueness of BillableService names and short names. Previously, it was possible to create duplicate services, leading to data integrity issues.

Changes

• Validator: Added BillableServiceValidator to reject duplicate names and short names (case-insensitive).
• Model Fix: Changed BillableService.billableServiceId from int to Integer to correctly distinguish between new (null ID) and existing (ID 0) services during validation.
• DAO: Enhanced HibernateBillableServiceDAO and BillableServiceSearch to support filtering by shortName for efficient validation.
• Tests: Added regression tests to BillableServiceServiceImplTest to verify the new constraints.

Related Issue

O3-5145

[NethmiRodrigo]

This mentions that "Administrators should clean duplicate data before deploying update", but I think we should have a better way of having a migration so that this change wouldn't affect existing implementations, that possible doesn't require administrators having to mess with existing data. Is that possible? @wikumChamith @dkayiwa tagging you for advice

[wikumChamith]

@UjjawalPrabhat have you added the constraints in the Hibernate mappings for Billable Services?

[wikumChamith]

This mentions that "Administrators should clean duplicate data before deploying update", but I think we should have a better way of having a migration so that this change wouldn't affect existing implementations, that possible doesn't require administrators having to mess with existing data. Is that possible? @wikumChamith @dkayiwa tagging you for advice

This might be a bit tricky since handling duplicates really depends on the user. Some may prefer to delete them, while others might want to rename them. If the next release is going to be a major one, I think this approach should be fine.

@dkayiwa @ibacher what do you both think?

[dkayiwa]

Is this pull request about adding a unique constraint for billable service fields? Or is it adding adding new fetch methods?

[denniskigen]

@wikumChamith can we move this forward?

[ibacher]

We don't generally enforce uniqueness constraints through Hibernate or DB level indices. Usually we have a validator that rejects the ability to create duplicates. I'm not sure why were doing something different here?

[UjjawalPrabhat]

We don't generally enforce uniqueness constraints through Hibernate or DB level indices. Usually we have a validator that rejects the ability to create duplicates. I'm not sure why were doing something different here?

@ibacher @dkayiwa I’ve updated my approach based on the discussion. Could you please take a look and let me know if there are any further enhancements or changes you’d recommend?