release-22.2: more details about desc validity errors during upgrades

[knz]

Fixes #102757.
Informs #104049.
Epic: CRDB-27642.

Before this patch:

ignoring invalid descriptor
‹defaultdb.public.test_upload_payload› (‹107›) with error because it
looks like known userfile-related corruption: ‹mutation job 800353382687703041: job not found›

which resulted after redaction into:

ignoring invalid descriptor ‹×› (‹×›) with error because it looks like
known userfile-related corruption: ‹×›

After this patch:

ignoring invalid descriptor
‹defaultdb.public.test_upload_payload› (107) with error because it
looks like known userfile-related corruption: mutation job 800353382687703041: job not found

which results after redaction into:

ignoring invalid descriptor ‹×› (107) with error because it looks like
known userfile-related corruption: mutation job 800353382687703041: job not found

Release note (cli change): Failures during descriptor validity checks
during cluster upgrades are now more detailed in redacted logs.

---

Release justification: better troubleshootability

[blathers-crl]

Thanks for opening a backport.

Please check the backport criteria before merging:

• Patches should only be created for serious issues or test-only changes.
• Patches should not break backwards-compatibility.
• Patches should change as little code as possible.
• Patches should not change on-disk formats or node communication protocols.
• Patches should not add new functionality.
• Patches must not add, edit, or otherwise modify cluster versions; or add version gates.

If some of the basic criteria cannot be satisfied, ensure that the exceptional criteria are satisfied within.

• There is a high priority need for the functionality that cannot wait until the next release and is difficult to address in another way.
• The new functionality is additive-only and only runs for clusters which have specifically “opted in” to it (e.g. by a cluster setting).
• New code is protected by a conditional check that is trivial to verify and ensures that it only runs for opt-in clusters.
• The PM and TL on the team that owns the changed code have signed off that the change obeys the above rules.

Add a brief release justification to the body of your PR to justify this backport.

Some other things to consider:

• What did we do to ensure that a user that doesn’t know & care about this backport, has no idea that it happened?
• Will this work in a cluster of mixed patch versions? Did we test that?
• If a user upgrades a patch version, uses this feature, and then downgrades, what happens?

[blathers-crl]

It looks like your PR touches production code but doesn't add or edit any test code. Did you consider adding tests to your PR?

_{🦉 Hoot! I am a Blathers, a bot for CockroachDB. My owner is dev-inf.}

[cockroach-teamcity]

This change is