Introduce ListAllWorkflowExecutions method in frontend

[sankari165]

What changed?
ListAllWorkflowExecutions method in frontend api

Why?
To be able to list all workflow executions with partial search support

How did you test it?
unit tests

Potential risks

Release notes

Documentation Changes

[coveralls]

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 018fc427-fc6f-4e0d-890d-e517fbee710b

Details

• 92 of 165 (55.76%) changed or added relevant lines in 10 files are covered.
• 55 unchanged lines in 14 files lost coverage.
• Overall coverage decreased (-0.03%) to 69.493%

---

Changes Missing Coverage	Covered Lines	Changed/Added Lines	%
common/persistence/wrappers/sampled/visibility_manager.go	0	5	0.0%
common/persistence/elasticsearch/es_visibility_metric_clients.go	0	13	0.0%
common/persistence/pinot/pinot_visibility_metric_clients.go	0	13	0.0%
service/frontend/api/handler.go	50	67	74.63%
common/types/shared.go	0	25	0.0%

Files with Coverage Reduction	New Missed Lines	%
common/cache/lru.go	2	92.89%
service/history/replication/task_processor.go	2	81.25%
service/history/task/transfer_active_task_executor.go	2	72.72%
common/util.go	2	91.78%
service/history/task/fetcher.go	2	85.05%
service/history/task/task.go	3	84.81%
service/history/handler/handler.go	3	96.2%
tools/cli/admin_db_decode_thrift.go	3	69.23%
service/matching/tasklist/task_list_manager.go	4	76.09%
service/frontend/api/handler.go	4	62.51%

Totals
Change from base Build 018facb4-1556-4d0a-a60a-2fec545c95e9:	-0.03%
Covered Lines:	102602
Relevant Lines:	147644

---

💛 - Coveralls

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 62.85714% with 39 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 68.14%. Comparing base (2f08de5) to head (0f3bc98).
Report is 4 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

Files	Coverage Δ
...mon/persistence/dataVisibilityManagerInterfaces.go	0.00% <ø> (ø)
...ommon/persistence/pinot_visibility_dual_manager.go	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...mon/persistence/pinot_visibility_triple_manager.go	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
common/persistence/visibility_dual_manager.go	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
common/persistence/visibility_single_manager.go	99.21% <100.00%> (+0.03%)	⬆️
...ommon/persistence/wrappers/errorinjectors/utils.go	93.97% <100.00%> (+0.04%)	⬆️
...persistence/wrappers/sampled/visibility_manager.go	77.77% <0.00%> (-2.76%)	⬇️
...ence/elasticsearch/es_visibility_metric_clients.go	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...rsistence/pinot/pinot_visibility_metric_clients.go	95.05% <0.00%> (-4.95%)	⬇️
service/frontend/api/handler.go	40.10% <66.00%> (+0.50%)	⬆️

... and 10 files with indirect coverage changes

---

Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 2f08de5...0f3bc98. Read the comment docs.

[3vilhamster]

Couple of nits, but LGTM

[3vilhamster]

nit: not sure why this log is here.
I would expect if err != nil to be right after wh.GetVisibilityManager().ListAllWorkflowExecutions(

[3vilhamster]

Interesting. Should it be exempted from code coverage?