test(redis-lua): drop flaky pool.Hits() assertion in VMReuse leak test

CI on PR #582 failed with:
    --- FAIL: TestLua_VMReuseDoesNotLeakGlobals (0.00s)
        Error: "0" is not greater than or equal to "1"
        redis_lua_pool_test.go:112

The assertion `require.GreaterOrEqual(t, pool.Hits(), uint64(1))`
requires the Script-B `pool.get(nil)` to return the exact
`pooledLuaState` that Script-A put back moments earlier. sync.Pool
is explicitly allowed to evict pooled items under GC pressure
between Put and Get (the comment above line 80 acknowledges this
non-determinism for pointer identity, but then contradicts itself
by asserting a hit counter that has the SAME source of
non-determinism).

Under GHA's -race runtime + whatever GC triggers during the test,
the Script-B Get sometimes returns a fresh allocation (miss), so
Hits() stays at 0 and the assertion fails.

Pool effectiveness already has its own dedicated deterministic
test: TestLua_PoolRecordsReuseVsAllocation asserts
hits + misses across a controlled loop, which is resilient to
sync.Pool eviction. This test is about the security invariant
("no globals leak across pooled states") — the hit counter line
does not contribute to that and only adds flake. Remove it; leave
a comment pointing to the deterministic test.

Verified with `go test -race -count=20 -run
TestLua_VMReuseDoesNotLeakGlobals ./adapter/` 20/20 green and the
full `-short` adapter suite 63s green.

Author: bootjp

adapter/redis_lua_pool_test.go

@@ -108,8 +108,14 @@ func TestLua_VMReuseDoesNotLeakGlobals(t *testing.T) {
 	require.NoError(t, stateB.DoString(`assert(string.upper("ok") == "OK")`))
 	pool.put(plsB)
 
-	// Pool should have registered at least one hit by now.
-	require.GreaterOrEqual(t, pool.Hits(), uint64(1), "pool never reported a hit")
+	// NOTE: we intentionally do NOT assert pool.Hits() >= 1 here.
+	// sync.Pool may evict items between Put and Get under GC pressure
+	// (same non-determinism acknowledged in the comment above line
+	// 80), so the Script-B Get may be a fresh allocation even though
+	// Script A's plsA was just Put. CI on GitHub Actions has
+	// reproduced this as a flake. Pool effectiveness is covered
+	// deterministically by TestLua_PoolRecordsReuseVsAllocation,
+	// which asserts hits + misses rather than hits alone.
 }
 
 // TestLua_VMReuseRestoresRebindsWhitelistedGlobals guards against a