[kz930]

What changes were proposed in this PR?

Every external output port of an operator that keeps its result is stored, but results were only ever read from the first port, so a Split's second output or an If's True branch could not be shown.

A pagination request can now name the output port to read, with the first port as the default, and the reply carries the port it read and that port's row count. The live result updates keep following the first port, so a client paging another port takes the count from the reply. The result store's count per operator now comes from the first port too: it was built from every stored port, so a terminal Split's second output could replace its first output's count, and the result panel paged by the wrong number.

On the frontend, the result service gives each extra port its own pagination service, which names its port in its requests, keeps no page cache and takes its row count from each reply. Every port's service takes its schema only from replies to its own requests, since all replies share one stream. The result table and its row detail can show any port; nothing picks a port other than the first yet, which comes with the pinned windows in #9052.

Any related issues, documentation, discussions?

Closes #9050. Closes #9053. Part of #9052.

How was this PR tested?

New cases in ExecutionResultServiceSpec check that a request for each of an operator's two ports returns that port's rows and count, and that an operator with two stored ports is reported by its first port's count; the latter fails on main. PaginatedResultEventSpec checks the reply's new fields and that it serializes to exactly what the frontend declares. New cases in the result service's and the result table's specs cover the per-port services and requests. The backend specs above and the affected frontend specs pass.

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

Generated-by: Claude Code (Claude Opus 5.5)

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[kz930]

@carloea2 could you take a look at this when you have a chance? Thanks!

[carloea2]

110 frontend tests pass locally. Two added port-switching regressions fail at this head.

[kz930]

Thanks, both reproduced. Fixed in 13c1294: a port change now starts from an empty table and an empty reply ends the loading, and a reply is dropped if the operator or port it was requested for is no longer shown; the two cases are added as regression tests in result-table-frame.component.spec.ts.

[github-actions]

Automated Reviewer Suggestions

Based on the git blame history of the changed files, we recommend the following reviewers:

• Contributors with relevant context: @aglinxinyuan, @yangzhang75, @Ma77Ball
  You can notify them by mentioning @aglinxinyuan, @yangzhang75, @Ma77Ball in a comment.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 97.43590% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 92.33%. Comparing base (22b82a2) to head (13c1294).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...result-table-frame/result-table-frame.component.ts	95.00%	0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main    #9054      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     92.33%   92.33%   -0.01%     
+ Complexity     5045     5044       -1     
============================================
  Files          1261     1261              
  Lines         54120    54141      +21     
  Branches       6768     6779      +11     
============================================
+ Hits          49974    49993      +19     
  Misses         2486     2486              
- Partials       1660     1662       +2     

Flag	Coverage Δ		*Carryforward flag
access-control-service	77.38% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 22b82a2
agent-service	99.16% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 22b82a2
amber	87.31% <ø> (-0.01%)	⬇️	Carriedforward from 22b82a2
computing-unit-managing-service	60.48% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 22b82a2
config-service	87.37% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 22b82a2
file-service	82.00% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 22b82a2
frontend	96.55% <97.43%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
notebook-migration-service	83.73% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 22b82a2
pyamber	98.57% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 22b82a2
workflow-compiling-service	72.43% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 22b82a2

*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.