refactor(relational_states): use fe table catalog for hash agg

[BowenXiao1999]

I hereby agree to the terms of the Singularity Data, Inc. Contributor License Agreement.

What's changed and what's your intention?

• Fix the wrong infer in infer_internal_table_catalog. Done some Simple DRY. Previous code is hard to maintain and read... May need more work in future.
• CN parse the table catalog and init the state table.
• Tweak some unit test, infer table catalog manually.

Part of #3475

Checklist

• I have written necessary docs and comments
• I have added necessary unit tests and integration tests
• All checks passed in ./risedev check (or alias, ./risedev c)

Refer to a related PR or issue link (optional)

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #3484 (78f9452) into main (744f71c) will decrease coverage by 0.06%.
The diff coverage is 41.25%.

❗ Current head 78f9452 differs from pull request most recent head 7081bc5. Consider uploading reports for the commit 7081bc5 to get more accurate results

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3484      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   74.43%   74.36%   -0.07%     
==========================================
  Files         769      769              
  Lines      107554   107397     -157     
==========================================
- Hits        80060    79870     -190     
- Misses      27494    27527      +33     

Flag	Coverage Δ
rust	74.36% <41.25%> (-0.07%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/stream/src/executor/aggregation/mod.rs	93.18% <ø> (ø)
src/stream/src/from_proto/hash_agg.rs	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...rc/frontend/src/optimizer/plan_node/logical_agg.rs	92.92% <48.80%> (-3.49%)	⬇️
src/stream/src/executor/hash_agg.rs	97.82% <100.00%> (+0.01%)	⬆️
src/frontend/src/handler/handle_privilege.rs	65.97% <0.00%> (-1.36%)	⬇️
src/batch/src/executor/row_seq_scan.rs	15.47% <0.00%> (-1.09%)	⬇️
src/object_store/src/object/mem.rs	84.84% <0.00%> (-1.02%)	⬇️
src/common/src/cache.rs	96.73% <0.00%> (-0.85%)	⬇️
...ge/src/hummock/sstable/forward_sstable_iterator.rs	95.12% <0.00%> (-0.72%)	⬇️
src/storage/src/hummock/iterator/backward_user.rs	95.82% <0.00%> (-0.70%)	⬇️
... and 25 more

📣 Codecov can now indicate which changes are the most critical in Pull Requests. Learn more

[st1page]

LGTM

[mergify]

Hey @BowenXiao1999, this pull request failed to merge and has been dequeued from the merge train. If you believe your PR failed in the merge train because of a flaky test, requeue it by commenting with @mergifyio requeue. More details can be found on the Queue: Embarked in merge train check-run.

[BowenXiao1999]

@Mergifyio requeue

[mergify]

requeue

❌ This pull request head commit has not been previously disembarked from queue.