[fix](regression) Wait for auto partition recycle - #65375

### What problem does this PR solve?

Related PR: #65375

Problem Summary:

`test_auto_new_recycle` uses `now()` to create five historical
partitions, one
current-day partition, and two future partitions, then asserts that
retention
leaves six partitions. The day-boundary guard previously ran near the
start of
the case and only reserved 20 seconds, while the time-sensitive
assertion ran
after multiple fixed sleeps. The case could therefore cross midnight
before
the final scheduler pass, changing the correct partition count from six
to
five.

This change moves the guard directly before the final time-sensitive
insert
and reserves 100 seconds for that section. It preserves coverage for the
current-day partition boundary and future partitions while preventing
the
final scheduler pass from crossing midnight.

#65646)

### What problem does this PR solve?

Related PRs: #65435, #65375

Problem Summary:

`test_auto_new_recycle` uses `now()` to create historical, current-day,
and
future partitions, then waits for asynchronous partition recycling. The
day-boundary guard ran near the start of the case, so it did not protect
the
final time-sensitive assertion after the preceding Awaitility waits.

This branch-4.1 backport moves the guard directly before the final
`now()`
insert. The 1300-second protected window covers the existing 1200-second
Awaitility timeout plus the insert and assertion overhead. The guard
only
sleeps when this final section would otherwise start too close to
midnight.

Testing:

- `git diff --check`
- Not run locally because no Doris regression environment was allocated.
The
  PR build will run the regression coverage.

### Release note

None

### Check List (For Author)

- Test
    - [x] Regression test
    - [ ] Unit Test
    - [ ] Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below)
    - [ ] No need to test or manual test. Explain why:
- [ ] This is a refactor/code format and no logic has been changed.
        - [ ] Previous test can cover this change.
        - [ ] No code files have been changed.
        - [ ] Other reason

- Behavior changed:
    - [x] No.
    - [ ] Yes.

- Does this need documentation?
    - [x] No.
    - [ ] Yes.

### Check List (For Reviewer who merge this PR)

- [ ] Confirm the release note
- [ ] Confirm test cases
- [ ] Confirm document
- [ ] Add branch pick label

)

### What problem does this PR solve?

Related PR: apache#65375

Problem Summary:

`test_auto_new_recycle` uses `now()` to create five historical
partitions, one
current-day partition, and two future partitions, then asserts that
retention
leaves six partitions. The day-boundary guard previously ran near the
start of
the case and only reserved 20 seconds, while the time-sensitive
assertion ran
after multiple fixed sleeps. The case could therefore cross midnight
before
the final scheduler pass, changing the correct partition count from six
to
five.

This change moves the guard directly before the final time-sensitive
insert
and reserves 100 seconds for that section. It preserves coverage for the
current-day partition boundary and future partitions while preventing
the
final scheduler pass from crossing midnight.

…t_generation (#70308)

### Background

An auto-partition table with `partition.retention_count = N` keeps only
its N latest historical partitions: the FE's `DynamicPartitionScheduler`
drops older ones on every run, once per
`dynamic_partition_check_interval_seconds` (600 by default).
`partition_p0/auto_partition/test_auto_new_recycle` lowers that interval
to 1 s and checks the partition count after each load or ALTER.
`audit/test_sql_digest_generation` checks that the audit log gets an
`sql_digest` only for queries slower than the FE config
`sql_digest_generation_threshold_ms`, once with the threshold at 0 and
once at 100000. Both suites are in group `nonConcurrent`.

### What problem does this PR solve?

Issue Number: None
Related PR: #65375 and #65646 (the branch-4.1 recycle-suite fixes by
@shuke987, ported here), #65343 (the branch-4.1 digest-suite fix by
@shuke987, ported here), #65435 (master's earlier move of the recycle
suite's day-boundary guard)
PR Type: Test

Problem Summary:

Both suites rely on timing the product does not promise. The recycle
suite checks the partition count after a fixed `sleep(8000)` (5 s after
an ALTER), while the drop happens asynchronously at an unbounded time
after the config change; branch-4.1's NonConcurrent pipeline failed at
the first such check repeatedly (#65375). The digest suite's threshold-0
check needs the query's elapsed time to be above 0 ms. This PR gives
both suites their branch-4.1/4.2 form: the recycle suite polls the
partition count every second, for at most 1200 s, and widens its
day-boundary guard to cover the poll; the digest query adds `sleep(1)`.
Both files become identical to branch-4.2.

### Details

- **Failure:** On master's public NonConcurrent pipeline neither suite
has failed on its own since mid-July: of about 8,000 runs each, the
recycle suite failed 3 times and the digest suite 87 times, all in
builds whose cluster had died (most suites failing). The failures that
motivated the fixes are on branch-4.1's pipeline (#65375); #65343 made
the digest query deterministic there.
- **Cause:** `ADMIN SET FRONTEND CONFIG` sets the scheduler's new
interval at once, but the scheduler sleeps in 5-second slices and
notices the change only at the next slice. It then runs
`executeDynamicPartition` over every registered table before the drop.
So the drop lands 0 to 5 s plus one full pass after the config change,
and a pass longer than about 3 s fails the 8-second check. In the digest
suite, `AuditLogHelper` writes a digest only when `elapseMs >
sql_digest_generation_threshold_ms`, and nothing bounds the elapsed time
of `select *` on a two-row table from below (9 to 15 ms locally). With
`sleep(1)` on each row it takes about 2 s, still far below the second
check's 100000 ms.
- **Stability evidence:** The recycle checks now wait for the drop and
fail only when the count misses the target for 1200 s. The poll runs on
the suite thread, because the framework sets
`Awaitility.pollInSameThread()` (#68338), so it does not leak
connections. Shortening one of master's waits to 1 s reproduces the
branch-4.1 failure shape, and the ported suite passes; mutants show that
both suites still catch wrong results (see Testing).

### Testing

All runs used `./run-regression-test.sh --run -d
partition_p0/auto_partition -s test_auto_new_recycle` or `--run -d audit
-s test_sql_digest_generation` against a local single-FE, single-BE
cluster built from master.

| Suite | Version | Result |
|---|---|---|
| `test_auto_new_recycle` | master | passes |
| `test_auto_new_recycle` | this PR | passes; the polls reached the
target after 1, 2, 1, 3 and 3 s |
| `test_auto_new_recycle` | master, with the wait before the
10-partition check cut to 1 s | fails as #65375 describes: `expected:
<101> but was: <10>` (master's `assertEquals` has its arguments swapped,
so 101 partitions were still there) |
| `test_auto_new_recycle` | this PR, expecting 11 partitions, poll
capped at 20 s | fails as it should: `ConditionTimeoutException` |
| `test_sql_digest_generation` | master | passes |
| `test_sql_digest_generation` | this PR | passes; the query took 2,024
and 2,025 ms |
| `test_sql_digest_generation` | this PR, second threshold 1000 ms |
fails as it should: `Count of sql_digest changed` |

The PR NonConcurrent pipeline runs both suites; cloud_p0 skips
`nonConcurrent` suites.

### Notes for Reviewers

- The day-boundary guard before the final `now()`-based section goes
from 100 s to 1300 s, as in #65646, so that it covers the 1200 s poll
plus the insert and checks. It sleeps only when that section would
otherwise start within 1300 s of midnight.
- Four more suites fixed in the same branch-4.1 batch need nothing on
master: #65340 (master #68449 enables the publish debug point on all
FEs, superseding the open port #65556), #65929 (master #68329 fixed the
actual cause, a connection leak), #65885 (master #69723 removed the V1
scanner whose message it also accepted), and #67363 (ported as #67402).

### Release note

None

### Check List (For Author)

- Behavior changed: No
- Does this need documentation: No
- Pre-submission status: Ready

### AI Disclosure

- Tool: Claude Code (Claude Opus 5.5)
- Generated: the port (both suites taken from branch-4.2), the local
verification runs, and this description
- Human review: not stated
- Prompts: The author asked to continue moving branch-4.2's changes back
to master, where six branch-4.1 test fixes were recorded as one task.
After the check showed that master already covers four of them and has
not failed on the other two, the author chose to port those two exactly
as branch-4.2 has them and to verify them on a local cluster.

Co-authored-by: shuke <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <[email protected]>