feat: Implementation of memorydb api

[archinksagar]

This is the initial moto implementation of AWS MemoryDB API.

[bblommers]

Hi @archinksagar, it looks like all tests fail in ServerMode - see https://github.com/getmoto/moto/actions/runs/10778987259/job/29891829117?pr=8108

Could you also merge in the latest master? I just pushed a fix to make Moto compatible with the latest botocore, and the build for this PR may still fail if that change is not included.

[archinksagar]

@bblommers Thanks for reviewing, I merged the latest master. If the tests fail in server mode, do I need to spell out the URL paths in urls.py? Would that fix it?

[bblommers]

Hi @archinksagar, yes, manually adding the URL's usually fixes the ServerMode tests. Let me know if it doesn't, or if you run into other issues, and I can have a closer look.

[archinksagar]

@bblommers how to I get all the correct URL paths for memorydb?

[bblommers]

@archinksagar You can run the MotoServer locally, and Moto will tell you. Within the virtual environment that you develop Moto in, run:

moto_server

And then run the tests against it:

TEST_SERVER_MODE=true pytest -sv tests/test_memorydb

The server logs will then tell you which URL's are being visited, and which requests are failing.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 96.25293% with 16 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 94.48%. Comparing base (063537b) to head (7508097).
Report is 8 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
moto/memorydb/models.py	94.31%	15 Missing ⚠️
moto/moto_server/werkzeug_app.py	50.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #8108      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   94.46%   94.48%   +0.02%     
==========================================
  Files        1141     1146       +5     
  Lines       98204    98740     +536     
==========================================
+ Hits        92764    93292     +528     
- Misses       5440     5448       +8     

Flag	Coverage Δ
servertests	28.82% <0.70%> (-0.14%)	⬇️
unittests	94.45% <96.25%> (+0.02%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[archinksagar]

@bblommers Server mode tests were failing because it did not find the correct URL pattern in werkzeug_app. Could you review again and let me know if the changes are right in werkzeug_app.py. Thankyou.

[bblommers]

This looks great - thank you @archinksagar!