fix(amber): add timeout and retry to dataset file-service requests

[Ma77Ball]

What changes were proposed in this PR?

• Route DatasetFileDocument's presigned-URL fetch and file download through a requests.Session with a (10s connect, 60s read) timeout, so a hung or unreachable file-service fails in bounded time instead of blocking the worker thread forever.
• Mount a urllib3 Retry policy on the session (3 retries, exponential backoff, retrying on connection errors and 5xx); both calls are idempotent GETs, so retrying is safe.

Any related issues, documentation, discussions?

Closes: #5666

How was this PR tested?

• Hardening change with no existing spec for this path; verified manually by loading the module and asserting the retry policy is wired (total=3, backoff=0.5, status_forcelist={500,502,503,504}, GET-only).
• Confirmed a request to a non-routable host now fails in bounded time (ConnectTimeout) rather than hanging, where the old no-timeout call would block indefinitely.
• ruff check and ruff format --check pass on the modified file.

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

Co-authored with Claude Opus 4.8 in compliance with ASF

[github-actions]

⚠️ Benchmark changes need a look

🟢 0 better · 🔴 9 worse · ⚪ 6 noise (<±5%) · 0 without baseline

Compared against main aca41f3 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	359	0.219	26,562/39,797/39,797 us	🔴 +23.3% / 🔴 +13.8%
🔴	bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	827	0.505	119,868/143,561/143,561 us	🔴 +10.2% / 🔴 -7.3%
🔴	bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	934	0.57	1,063,354/1,158,802/1,158,802 us	🔴 +5.1% / 🔴 +13.3%

Baseline details

Latest main aca41f3 from same runner

config	metric	PR	latest main	7d avg	Δ latest	Δ 7d
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	359 tuples/sec	442 tuples/sec	410.82 tuples/sec	-18.8%	-12.6%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.219 MB/s	0.27 MB/s	0.251 MB/s	-18.9%	-12.7%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p50	26,562 us	21,549 us	23,785 us	+23.3%	+11.7%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p95	39,797 us	33,026 us	34,980 us	+20.5%	+13.8%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p99	39,797 us	33,026 us	34,980 us	+20.5%	+13.8%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	827 tuples/sec	858 tuples/sec	891.94 tuples/sec	-3.6%	-7.3%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.505 MB/s	0.524 MB/s	0.544 MB/s	-3.6%	-7.2%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p50	119,868 us	115,929 us	112,277 us	+3.4%	+6.8%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p95	143,561 us	130,299 us	139,802 us	+10.2%	+2.7%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p99	143,561 us	130,299 us	139,802 us	+10.2%	+2.7%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	934 tuples/sec	940 tuples/sec	1,041 tuples/sec	-0.6%	-10.3%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.57 MB/s	0.574 MB/s	0.635 MB/s	-0.7%	-10.3%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p50	1,063,354 us	1,065,197 us	972,714 us	-0.2%	+9.3%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p95	1,158,802 us	1,102,635 us	1,023,057 us	+5.1%	+13.3%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p99	1,158,802 us	1,102,635 us	1,023,057 us	+5.1%	+13.3%

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
0,10,10,64,20,557.33,200,128000,359,0.219,26562.45,39797.14,39797.14
1,100,10,64,20,2417.30,2000,1280000,827,0.505,119868.26,143561.40,143561.40
2,1000,10,64,20,21405.25,20000,12800000,934,0.570,1063354.13,1158801.97,1158801.97

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 52.76%. Comparing base (aca41f3) to head (df4a363).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main    #5667      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     52.85%   52.76%   -0.09%     
+ Complexity     2620     2506     -114     
============================================
  Files          1090     1090              
  Lines         42176    42098      -78     
  Branches       4531     4525       -6     
============================================
- Hits          22293    22214      -79     
+ Misses        18573    18572       -1     
- Partials       1310     1312       +2     

Flag	Coverage Δ		*Carryforward flag
access-control-service	71.42% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from a044287
agent-service	34.36% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from a044287
amber	52.59% <ø> (-0.28%)	⬇️	Carriedforward from a044287
computing-unit-managing-service	1.65% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from a044287
config-service	56.71% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from a044287
file-service	57.06% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from a044287
frontend	47.93% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from a044287
pyamber	90.76% <100.00%> (+0.03%)	⬆️
python	90.74% <ø> (-0.01%)	⬇️	Carriedforward from a044287
workflow-compiling-service	58.69% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from a044287

*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.