Add support for multi table update with non literal value

[harshit-gangal]

Description

This PR adds support for multi table update with update expression having dependency from multiple tables.

e.g. update t1, t2 set t1.col = t2.col + 2 where t1.id = t2.id and t1.foo = 2;
Here, update of t1.col is dependent on value of t2's table col

Related Issue(s)

• Closes Feature Request: Add support for multi table update for non literal column update using other dependent table #15982

Checklist

• Tests were added or are not required
• Did the new or modified tests pass consistently locally and on CI?
• Documentation was added or is not required

[vitess-bot]

Review Checklist

Hello reviewers! 👋 Please follow this checklist when reviewing this Pull Request.

General

• Ensure that the Pull Request has a descriptive title.
• Ensure there is a link to an issue (except for internal cleanup and flaky test fixes), new features should have an RFC that documents use cases and test cases.

Tests

• Bug fixes should have at least one unit or end-to-end test, enhancement and new features should have a sufficient number of tests.

Documentation

• Apply the release notes (needs details) label if users need to know about this change.
• New features should be documented.
• There should be some code comments as to why things are implemented the way they are.
• There should be a comment at the top of each new or modified test to explain what the test does.

New flags

• Is this flag really necessary?
• Flag names must be clear and intuitive, use dashes (-), and have a clear help text.

If a workflow is added or modified:

• Each item in Jobs should be named in order to mark it as required.
• If the workflow needs to be marked as required, the maintainer team must be notified.

Backward compatibility

• Protobuf changes should be wire-compatible.
• Changes to _vt tables and RPCs need to be backward compatible.
• RPC changes should be compatible with vitess-operator
• If a flag is removed, then it should also be removed from vitess-operator and arewefastyet, if used there.
• vtctl command output order should be stable and awk-able.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 80.58252% with 20 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 68.48%. Comparing base (8b60b59) to head (be4fd87).
Report is 8 commits behind head on main.

❗ Current head be4fd87 differs from pull request most recent head 7d9d50f

Please upload reports for the commit 7d9d50f to get more accurate results.

Files	Patch %	Lines
go/vt/vtgate/engine/dml_with_input.go	52.38%	20 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #15980      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   68.46%   68.48%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files        1562     1562              
  Lines      197059   197154      +95     
==========================================
+ Hits       134919   135016      +97     
+ Misses      62140    62138       -2     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[GuptaManan100]

Rest LGTM

[systay]

I'm confused here. Why are we using user.id in ::dml_vals when we have the :ue_id parameter available. ::dml_vals will only contain a single value here, right?

[harshit-gangal]

This can be changed from list argument to single argument.
It is not a problem as-is. Definitely, this can be changed