release-22.2: ui: add transaction exec id to blocking stmts table

[blathers-crl]

Backport 1/1 commits from #87795 on behalf of @xinhaoz.

/cc @cockroachdb/release

---

Follow up to #87793

Previously, if an active statement was blocked, we would show the statement it was blocked by in a table in the form of the statement execution id and sql query. Since it is possible for the txn a stmt is blocked by to not be currently executing a query, these columns could be blank and it was not possible to figure out which txn was blocking the stmt. This commit adds the Transaction Execution ID column for the blocked statements table in the active statement details view so that we can link to the blocking txn even when there is no stmt being executed by the blocking txn..

Release note (ui change): transaction execution id column now exists in the blocked statements table in the active stmt details page

---

Release justification: bug fix, low risk high benefit update to existing functionality

[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?

[cockroach-teamcity]

This change is 

[maryliag]

Reviewable status: complete! 1 of 0 LGTMs obtained (waiting on @xinhaoz)