addMetadata and addTag do not work with parse-server-fs-adapter

[ma-amin]

New Issue Checklist

• I am not disclosing a vulnerability.
• I am not just asking a question.
• I have searched through existing issues.
• I can reproduce the issue with the latest versions of Parse Server and the Parse FS Adapter.

Issue Description

addMetadata and addTag do not work in Cloud Code with Parse FS Adapter.

Steps to reproduce

I used the below code but the createdById and groupName values were not saved

Parse.Cloud.beforeSaveFile(async (req) => {
    const {file, user} = req;
    file.addMetadata('createdById', user.id);
    file.addTag('groupName', groupName);
});

Actual Outcome

The value createdById and groupName were not saved in ParsFile. Actually in ParsFile, metadata and tags are not saved.

Expected Outcome

When file.metadata() and file.tags() are called, the values createdById and groupName should respectively be returned

Environment

Server

• Parse Server version: 5.2.7
• Operating system: Ubuntu
• Local or remote host: etc

Database

• System (MongoDB or Postgres): MongoDB
• Database version: 5.0.10
• Local or remote host: etc

Logs

None

[parse-github-assistant]

Thanks for opening this issue!

• 🚀 You can help us to fix this issue faster by opening a pull request with a failing test. See our Contribution Guide for how to make a pull request, or read our New Contributor's Guide if this is your first time contributing.

[mtrezza]

Not sure whether this is a bug or a feature request, depending on whether Parse FS adapter currently supports the tags feature at all, or whether it has to be implemented for each adapter individually. In any case, I've labelled it as a bug feature for now.

[cbaker6]

Metadata and tags were originally intended for the S3 adapter, see #6341. I believe the Parse Server just forwards these key/values to the respective storage, so other adapters whose storage doesn’t use them (i.e. FS adapter) will discard them. It seems like this feature is requesting to store these in the ParseFile object in the database so you can read them later. If this is the case, I would imagine there would also need to be a way to keep this in sync with the respective info in the storage which may not be straight forward.