[dev-1.1.2](memtracker) Fix old mem tracker consumption is less than 0

[xinyiZzz]

Proposed changes

Issue Number: close #xxx

Problem summary

The old and new mem trackers coexist on v1.1.2. In #11943, _instance_mem_tracker and _new_instance_mem_tracker are bound to the same profile by mistake, and the memory size recorded by _new_instance_mem_tracker through the tcmalloc hook is not always positive.

#0  0x00007f00aa2f2fbb in raise () from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6
#1  0x00007f00aa2d8864 in abort () from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6
#2  0x000055797ba76bf2 in google::DumpStackTraceAndExit () at src/utilities.cc:160
#3  0x00005579824a62bd in google::LogMessage::Fail () at src/logging.cc:1650
#4  0x00005579824a87f9 in google::LogMessage::SendToLog (this=0x7f0066e6f2a0) at src/logging.cc:1607
#5  0x00005579824a5e26 in google::LogMessage::Flush (this=0x7f0066e6f2a0) at src/logging.cc:1476
#6  0x00005579824a8e69 in google::LogMessageFatal::~LogMessageFatal (this=<optimized out>, __in_chrg=<optimized out>) at src/logging.cc:2226
#7  0x000055797c4f6a8b in doris::MemTracker::Release (this=0x613000200380, bytes=8192) at /doris/be/src/runtime/mem_tracker.h:253
#8  0x000055797d090315 in doris::RowBatch::clear (this=0x614000314c40) at /doris/be/src/runtime/row_batch.cpp:230
#9  0x000055797d0904c1 in doris::RowBatch::~RowBatch (this=0x614000314c40, __in_chrg=<optimized out>) at /doris/be/src/runtime/row_batch.cpp:236
#10 0x000055797d090576 in doris::RowBatch::~RowBatch (this=0x614000314c40, __in_chrg=<optimized out>) at /doris/be/src/runtime/row_batch.cpp:237
#11 0x000055797d08261f in std::default_delete<doris::RowBatch>::operator() (this=0x62100287ee98, __ptr=0x614000314c40) at /include/c++/11/bits/unique_ptr.h:85
#12 0x000055797d082de8 in std::__uniq_ptr_impl<doris::RowBatch, std::default_delete<doris::RowBatch> >::reset (this=0x62100287ee98, __p=0x0)
    at /include/c++/11/bits/unique_ptr.h:182
#13 0x000055797d081022 in std::unique_ptr<doris::RowBatch, std::default_delete<doris::RowBatch> >::reset (this=0x62100287ee98,
    __p=<error reading variable: Cannot access memory at address 0xffffffffffffffc0>) at /include/c++/11/bits/unique_ptr.h:456
#14 0x000055797d07b065 in doris::PlanFragmentExecutor::close (this=0x62100287e570) at /doris/be/src/runtime/plan_fragment_executor.cpp:668
#15 0x000055797ce43727 in doris::FragmentExecState::execute (this=0x62100287e500) at /doris/be/src/runtime/fragment_mgr.cpp:244
#16 0x000055797ce4adb3 in doris::FragmentMgr::_exec_actual(std::shared_ptr<doris::FragmentExecState>, std::function<void (doris::PlanFragmentExecutor*)>) (this=0x614000013c40,
    exec_state=std::shared_ptr<doris::FragmentExecState> (use count 3, weak count 0) = {...}, cb=...) at /doris/be/src/runtime/fragment_mgr.cpp:482

Checklist(Required)

1. Does it affect the original behavior:
   • Yes
   • No
   • I don't know
2. Has unit tests been added:
   • Yes
   • No
   • No Need
3. Has document been added or modified:
   • Yes
   • No
   • No Need
4. Does it need to update dependencies:
   • Yes
   • No
5. Are there any changes that cannot be rolled back:
   • Yes (If Yes, please explain WHY)
   • No

Further comments

If this is a relatively large or complex change, kick off the discussion at dev@doris.apache.org by explaining why you chose the solution you did and what alternatives you considered, etc...

[yiguolei]

LGTM