[Feature][Resource Center] Add support for Alibaba Cloud OSS as storage for resource center

[EricGao888]

Search before asking

• I had searched in the issues and found no similar feature requirement.

Description

• In DS 3.0.0-xxx, we have StorageOperate interface and we could integrate with remote object storage through API . Currently we have already supported AWS S3, we could support Alibaba Cloud OSS in the same way. https://github.com/apache/dolphinscheduler/blob/dev/dolphinscheduler-common/src/main/java/org/apache/dolphinscheduler/common/utils/S3Utils.java
• Using OSS Client API instead of OSSFS, we do not need to worry about the version of hadoop. [Feature][commom] support hadoop-aliyun oss filesystem #3424 (comment) BTW, OSSFS seems no more under good maintenance and is not very stable.

Use case

• Already described above.

Related issues

• related [feature] hadoop-aliyun oss存储 #2864

Are you willing to submit a PR?

• Yes I am willing to submit a PR!

Code of Conduct

• I agree to follow this project's Code of Conduct

[github-actions]

Thank you for your feedback, we have received your issue, Please wait patiently for a reply.

• In order for us to understand your request as soon as possible, please provide detailed information、version or pictures.
• If you haven't received a reply for a long time, you can join our slack and send your question to channel #troubleshooting

[ruanwenjun]

That will be great if we can support with Alibaba Cloud OSS. BTW, we need to refactor the current naming of StorageOperate implementation, the XXUtils is bad.

[EricGao888]

That will be great if we can support with Alibaba Cloud OSS. BTW, we need to refactor the current naming of StorageOperate implementation, the XXUtils is bad.

@ruanwenjun Since the interface is called StorageOperate, what about renaming XXUtils to XXOperator? S3Operator, OssOperator, etc.

[ruanwenjun]

That will be great if we can support with Alibaba Cloud OSS. BTW, we need to refactor the current naming of StorageOperate implementation, the XXUtils is bad.

@ruanwenjun Since the interface is called StorageOperate, what about renaming XXUtils to XXOperator? S3Operator, OssOperator, etc.

It's Ok to me, if we can rename to xxStorageOperate.