refactor(hash-agg): rename distribution keys to group keys

[BowenXiao1999]

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

What's changed and what's your intention?

As you can see in the code, when serialize "distribution_keys" in FE, it's logical.group_keys(). However in some cases, the dist key might be different from group keys (See the pic above, the hash agg and hash join are in same fragment). So it's better to distinguish dist keys and group keys.

In future, after we done the refactor of state table, might no need to pass dist keys in each StreamNode. Ideally, we can get dist keys from state table and encode it as vnode.

ref: #3456.

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)

[liurenjie1024]

LGTM

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #3492 (88d3389) into main (321c259) will increase coverage by 0.02%.
The diff coverage is 80.00%.

❗ Current head 88d3389 differs from pull request most recent head 8490115. Consider uploading reports for the commit 8490115 to get more accurate results

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3492      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   74.40%   74.43%   +0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         768      769       +1     
  Lines      107647   107511     -136     
==========================================
- Hits        80098    80024      -74     
+ Misses      27549    27487      -62     

Flag	Coverage Δ
rust	74.43% <80.00%> (+0.02%)	⬆️

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

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/stream/src/from_proto/hash_agg.rs	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...rontend/src/optimizer/plan_node/stream_hash_agg.rs	95.94% <100.00%> (ø)
src/object_store/src/object/mem.rs	84.84% <0.00%> (-1.02%)	⬇️
src/frontend/src/binder/expr/function.rs	81.75% <0.00%> (-0.89%)	⬇️
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%)	⬇️
src/storage/src/storage_failpoints/test_sstable.rs	96.62% <0.00%> (-0.46%)	⬇️
src/connector/src/filesystem/file_common.rs	80.35% <0.00%> (-0.45%)	⬇️
src/storage/src/hummock/compactor.rs	77.67% <0.00%> (-0.43%)	⬇️
... and 24 more

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

[fuyufjh]

Can you paste the query? Why there are so many group keys...

[BowenXiao1999]

Can you paste the query? Why there are so many group keys...

@fuyufjh cc, tpch_q2

https://github.com/singularity-data/risingwave/blob/45146158705d3a24be3269ffcb2004899204aae3/src/frontend/test_runner/tests/testdata/tpch.yaml#L178

[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.