Added last_asset_event_id and last_asset_event_timestamp to the AssetResponse

[jroachgolf84]

This pull request adds the last_asset_event_id and last_asset_event_timestamp fields to the AssetResponse model, and thus, the /assets endpoint. The original use-case was to make the Asset list view sortable by the last Asset Event. However, there is a much larger use-case at play here; the ability to easily determine the timestamp for the last Asset Event for a certain Asset. This is especially applicable for Asset Watchers.

By default, the last_asset_event_id and last_asset_event_timestamp fields are returned as null. It's not until the first Asset Event that these fields are populated.

Unit-tests were added/updated for all changes made.

related: #47164

[jroachgolf84]

@pierrejeambrun, @bbovenzi, #49994 closed in favor of this PR.

[bbovenzi]

Manually testing in the UI and lgtm.

@pierrejeambrun can you take a look for the API portion? We'll want to add sorting and filtering soon.

[bugraoz93]

Overall looks good. I only have a comment related to a loop in the code :) Thanks for the PR!

[bugraoz93]

Thanks for the update! Looks good

[jroachgolf84]

Changed implemented!

[pierrejeambrun]

Looks good to me.

Just wondering if last_asset_event_id and last_asset_event_timestamp shouldn't be flat in the asset model but in a nested object such as:

   "last_asset_event": {
       "id": 
       "timestamp":
   }

(A lighter version of the AssetEventResponse)

That's a minor detail but if we later need more fields from the last asset event, then we will have all those field flats mixed up with the asset model.

[jroachgolf84]

Looks good to me.

Just wondering if last_asset_event_id and last_asset_event_timestamp shouldn't be flat in the asset model but in a nested object such as:

   "last_asset_event": {
       "id": 
       "timestamp":
   }

(A lighter version of the AssetEventResponse)

That's a minor detail but if we later need more fields from the last asset event, then we will have all those field flats mixed up with the asset model.

I think that makes total sense. I'll go ahead and implement that this morning.

[jroachgolf84]

@pierrejeambrun, I've gone ahead and implemented that change!

[rawwar]

Thanks! Looking good. Just a few nits

[pierrejeambrun]

Unrelated CI failure, merging.

[pierrejeambrun]

Thanks @jroachgolf84!