[Bug](iceberg) fix BE core when reading MOR table with rowid + lazy read

[xy720]

What problem does this PR solve?

Problem Summary:

coredump:

*** Query id: 8bxxx-xxx ***
*** is nereids: 1 ***
*** tablet id: 0 ***
*** Aborted at 1785897717 (unix time) try "date -d @1785897717" if you are using GNU date ***
*** Current BE git commitID: 2607291 ***
*** SIGSEGV address not mapped to object (@0x0) received by PID 1002 (TID 3954234 OR 0x7f42d110e6c0) from PID 0; stack trace: ***
0# doris::signal::(anonymous namespace)::FailureSignalHandler(int, siginfo_t*, void*) in /usr/local/service/doris/lib/be/doris_be
 1# PosixSignals::chained_handler(int, siginfo*, void*) [clone .part.10] in /usr/local/jdk/lib/server/libjvm.so
 2# JVM_handle_linux_signal in /usr/local/jdk/lib/server/libjvm.so
 3# 0x00007F8C17A4ABB0 in /lib64/libc.so.6
 4# doris::Block::filter_block_internal(doris::Block*, std::vector<unsigned int, std::allocator<unsigned int> > const&, doris::PODArray<unsigned char, 4096ul, doris::Allocator<false, false, false, doris::DefaultMemoryAllocator, true>, 16ul, 15ul> const&) in /usr/local/service/doris/lib/be/doris_be
 5# doris::Block::filter_block_internal(doris::Block*, doris::PODArray<unsigned char, 4096ul, doris::Allocator<false, false, false, doris::DefaultMemoryAllocator, true>, 16ul, 15ul> const&, unsigned int) in /usr/local/service/doris/lib/be/doris_be
 6# doris::IcebergTableReader::get_next_block_inner(doris::Block*, unsigned long*, bool*) in /usr/local/service/doris/lib/be/doris_be
 7# doris::TableFormatReader::get_next_block(doris::Block*, unsigned long*, bool*) in /usr/local/service/doris/lib/be/doris_be
 8# doris::FileScanner::_get_block_wrapped(doris::RuntimeState*, doris::Block*, bool*) in /usr/local/service/doris/lib/be/doris_be
 9# doris::FileScanner::_get_block_impl(doris::RuntimeState*, doris::Block*, bool*) in /usr/local/service/doris/lib/be/doris_be
10# doris::Scanner::get_block(doris::RuntimeState*, doris::Block*, bool*) in /usr/local/service/doris/lib/be/doris_be
11# doris::Scanner::get_block_after_projects(doris::RuntimeState*, doris::Block*, bool*) in /usr/local/service/doris/lib/be/doris_be
12# doris::ScannerScheduler::_scanner_scan(std::shared_ptr<doris::ScannerContext>, std::shared_ptr<doris::ScanTask>) in /usr/local/service/doris/lib/be/doris_be
13# std::_Function_handler<bool (), doris::ScannerScheduler::submit(std::shared_ptr<doris::ScannerContext>, std::shared_ptr<doris::ScanTask>)::$_0::operator()() const::{lambda()#1}>::_M_invoke(std::_Any_data const&) in /usr/local/service/doris/lib/be/doris_be
14# doris::ScannerSplitRunner::process_for(std::chrono::duration<long, std::ratio<1l, 1000000000l> >) in /usr/local/service/doris/lib/be/doris_be
15# doris::PrioritizedSplitRunner::process() in /usr/local/service/doris/lib/be/doris_be
16# doris::TimeSharingTaskExecutor::_dispatch_thread() in /usr/local/service/doris/lib/be/doris_be
17# doris::Thread::supervise_thread(void*) in /usr/local/service/doris/lib/be/doris_be
18# start_thread in /lib64/libc.so.6
19# __GI___clone3 in /lib64/libc.so.6

The master branch is fine.
This bug only exists in 4.1 branch and introduce by: #61818

This commit only pick this line from the pr in master: #60482

Release note

None

Check List (For Author)

• Test

  • Regression test
  • Unit Test
  • Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below)
  • No need to test or manual test. Explain why:
    • This is a refactor/code format and no logic has been changed.
    • Previous test can cover this change.
    • No code files have been changed.
    • Other reason

• Behavior changed:

  • No.
  • Yes.

• Does this need documentation?

  • No.
  • Yes.

Check List (For Reviewer who merge this PR)

• Confirm the release note
• Confirm test cases
• Confirm document
• Add branch pick label

[hello-stephen]

Thank you for your contribution to Apache Doris.
Don't know what should be done next? See How to process your PR.

Please clearly describe your PR:

1. What problem was fixed (it's best to include specific error reporting information). How it was fixed.
2. Which behaviors were modified. What was the previous behavior, what is it now, why was it modified, and what possible impacts might there be.
3. What features were added. Why was this function added?
4. Which code was refactored and why was this part of the code refactored?
5. Which functions were optimized and what is the difference before and after the optimization?

[xy720]

run buildall

[hello-stephen]

BE UT Coverage Report

Increment line coverage 100.00% (1/1) 🎉

Increment coverage report
Complete coverage report

Category	Coverage
Function Coverage	58.27% (24674/42347)
Line Coverage	42.51% (248499/584588)
Region Coverage	38.57% (196303/508963)
Branch Coverage	39.94% (89812/224850)

[hello-stephen]

BE Regression && UT Coverage Report

Increment line coverage 100.00% (1/1) 🎉

Increment coverage report
Complete coverage report

Category	Coverage
Function Coverage	73.62% (30387/41275)
Line Coverage	57.55% (333939/580213)
Region Coverage	54.37% (277485/510329)
Branch Coverage	55.32% (124264/224608)

[github-actions]

PR approved by at least one committer and no changes requested.

[github-actions]

PR approved by anyone and no changes requested.

[hubgeter]

LGTM