feat: adding explicit batching

[vlastahajek]

Closes #103

Proposed Changes

Added Batcher for simple explicit batching

Checklist

• CHANGELOG.md updated
• Rebased/mergeable
• A test has been added if appropriate
• Tests pass
• Commit messages are conventional
• Sign CLA (if not already signed)

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 86.18%. Comparing base (5671330) to head (bf9fb71).
Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #107      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   85.35%   86.18%   +0.82%     
==========================================
  Files          14       15       +1     
  Lines        1127     1194      +67     
==========================================
+ Hits          962     1029      +67     
  Misses        137      137              
  Partials       28       28              

Flag	Coverage Δ
	?

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.

[bednar]

@vlastahajek, thanks for your PR 👍. I have a small request regarding the formatting of our CHANGELOG.md:

[karel-rehor]

I was wondering if this could be a variadic function, so that []*influxdb3.Point could be used as an argument as well, or whether we might want o support adding []*influxdb3.Point in another function.

[vlastahajek]

Good point. Variadic parameters look good.

[karel-rehor]

Looks Good. But I have two questions.

1. Shouldn't there be a function in batcher to add a slice or array of *influxdb3.Point instead of just a single point.
2. I noticed that using Option methods WithSize() and WithCapacity() it is possible to create a batcher with Size > Capacity. My understanding of Golang is that append will be lenient and reallocate as needed, but then the value of Batcher.capacity will no longer represent the true capacity of the internal buffer. Are we OK with this?

[vlastahajek]

@karel-rehor,

1. Answered in the inline comment
2. The capacity is just an initial capacity. If the batch-size is bigger, reallocation will occur.

[karel-rehor]

Tests pass locally. Examples work. Looks Good.

[srebhan]

Awesome! Thanks @vlastahajek!

[bednar]

LGTM 🚀