vtorc: use sqlite3 SQL dialect only

[timvaillancourt]

Description

As agreed in a Vitess-Slack discussion, this PR removes the regex-based, inline translation of SQL dialects in vtorc and uses the pure sqlite3 dialect instead. This is to avoid the high CPU penalty we notice when 100s of tablets are watched

The majority of the changes are changing use of now() and unix_timestamp to sqlite3 equivalents we were rewritting queries to

While I made this switch I made \t white space and capitalisation of SQL consistent. It seems the majority of SQL was lower-case, so I standardised on this - happy to do the opposite

Related Issue(s)

Checklist

• "Backport to:" labels have been added if this change should be back-ported to release branches
• If this change is to be back-ported to previous releases, a justification is included in the PR description
• 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

Deployment Notes

[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 75.07692% with 81 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 67.15%. Comparing base (fa5a2c5) to head (4d73aab).
Report is 9 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
go/vt/vtorc/logic/topology_recovery_dao.go	0.00%	47 Missing ⚠️
go/vt/vtorc/logic/disable_recovery.go	0.00%	10 Missing ⚠️
go/vt/vtorc/inst/instance_dao.go	89.33%	8 Missing ⚠️
go/vt/vtorc/logic/tablet_discovery.go	0.00%	8 Missing ⚠️
go/vt/vtorc/inst/analysis_dao.go	96.66%	5 Missing ⚠️
go/vt/external/golib/sqlutils/statement.go	75.00%	2 Missing ⚠️
go/vt/vtorc/process/health.go	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #17120      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   67.17%   67.15%   -0.03%     
==========================================
  Files        1571     1570       -1     
  Lines      252246   252184      -62     
==========================================
- Hits       169458   169355     -103     
- Misses      82788    82829      +41     

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

[timvaillancourt]

Suggested change

	?, ?, datetime('now'), ?,
	?, ?, datetime('now'), ?

[dbussink]

While I made this switch I made \t white space and capitalisation of SQL consistent. It seems the majority of SQL was lower-case, so I standardised on this - happy to do the opposite

I'd say it's a lot easier to review / test this and not do this in the same PR. Fixing the style is maybe something to separate out into a different change so it's essentially a no-op. Makes also reviewing the changes here a lot easier to review then.

[timvaillancourt]

Closing in favour of clone PR #17124 that passes CI