chore: single storage client support multiple blob-containers

[Meir017]

closes #739

[badrishc]

I don't see how this solution would work. The reason we create a different factory each time is that we need to initialize the factory with a different baseName for each factory. That way, the instances created by the factory will all use the same base name. See GarnetServerOptions->GetInitializedDeviceFactory for how this is used.

[Meir017]

I don't see how this solution would work. The reason we create a different factory each time is that we need to initialize the factory with a different baseName for each factory. That way, the instances created by the factory will all use the same base name. See GarnetServerOptions->GetInitializedDeviceFactory for how this is used.

I see, I was confused here the scope of AzureStorageNamedDeviceFactory, I think we need another layer for the AzureStorageNamedDeviceFactory as I think for a single blob storage we should create at most a single client, but a single client could interact with multiple blob containers - and currently the code supports a 1:1 relationship between storage-account and blob-container

[badrishc]

Agreed, something is off re: the abstraction right now. We need to be able to define the base name independently of the storage library instance.

[badrishc]

Closing in favor of #970