fix: Throw HTTP Status 429 error when there are too many get Sagemaker Presigned URL requests

[nguyen102]

Issue #, if available:

Description of changes:
When multiple requests are made to retrieve a Sagemaker URL, we can not process more than one request at a time.

We'll now throw a HTTP Status Code 429 error, with the following body

429 error
{
    "requestId": "",
    "code": "tooManyRequests",
    "message": "Please wait 30 seconds before requesting Sagemaker URL"
}

Before the fix this was what we returned

500 error
{
    "requestId": "",
    "code": "internalError",
    "message": "Could not obtain a lock"
}

Checklist:

• Have you successfully deployed to an AWS account with your changes?
• Have you written new tests for your core changes, as applicable?

AS review ticket id:

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #942 (baee991) into develop (15eb4d3) will increase coverage by 0.01%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

❗ Current head baee991 differs from pull request most recent head 06d8b0f. Consider uploading reports for the commit 06d8b0f to get more accurate results

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop     #942      +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage    51.45%   51.47%   +0.01%     
===========================================
  Files          295      295              
  Lines        16790    16795       +5     
  Branches      2598     2600       +2     
===========================================
+ Hits          8640     8645       +5     
  Misses        7163     7163              
  Partials       987      987              

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
...rvice-catalog/environment-sc-connection-service.js	61.49% <0.00%> (+1.05%)	⬆️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 15eb4d3...06d8b0f. Read the comment docs.

[SanketD92]

Are we throwing the stack trace itself? Rather could we throw a boom error with just the e.code if required?

[nguyen102]

This line will rethrow what was already thrown. In the code, it looks like that will be boom errors. That means there won't be a stack trace.