vtorc: cleanup discover queue, add concurrency flag

[timvaillancourt]

Description

This PR cleans up the VTOrc discover queue code, mainly by removing all locking from .Consume(); this was achieved by adding type queueItem struct and pushing this to the channel instead, with the key and time.Time included. Previously this time.Time was stored in a map with mutex locks

The .QueueLen() now returns just the len() of the queue channel. Before this metric would include the length of the channel plus all that are "in processing" (between .Consume() and .Release()), which I'm unsure is necessary. Simplifying this removed the need for a lock in .QueueLen()

Finally, the --discovery-workers flag was added to control how many workers consume the discovery queue

Benchmark:

tvaillancourt@tvailla-ltmawfe vitess % go test -v -bench=. ./go/vt/vtorc/discovery/...
=== RUN   TestQueue
--- PASS: TestQueue (0.00s)
goos: darwin
goarch: arm64
pkg: vitess.io/vitess/go/vt/vtorc/discovery
cpu: Apple M3 Max
BenchmarkQueues
BenchmarkQueues/New
BenchmarkQueues/New-14         	    4726	    244573 ns/op
BenchmarkQueues/Legacy
BenchmarkQueues/Legacy-14      	    3610	    338468 ns/op
PASS
ok  	vitess.io/vitess/go/vt/vtorc/discovery	3.923s

NOTE: New == this PR, Legacy == current queue

Related Issue(s)

#17330

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 87.09677% with 4 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 67.52%. Comparing base (0c6ad63) to head (bc27b01).
Report is 29 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
go/vt/vtorc/logic/vtorc.go	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️
go/vt/vtorc/config/config.go	66.66%	1 Missing ⚠️
go/vt/vtorc/discovery/queue.go	96.15%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #17825      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   67.44%   67.52%   +0.08%     
==========================================
  Files        1592     1595       +3     
  Lines      258076   259641    +1565     
==========================================
+ Hits       174051   175325    +1274     
- Misses      84025    84316     +291     

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

[GuptaManan100]

Rest I think its pretty good. I don't see why we had both queuedKeys and consumedKeys in the structure. This is fine.

[deepthi]

The naming of the flag is debatable. Rest LGTM.

[deepthi]

This is somewhat of a nit, but this isn't really a "max" is it? It's the actual concurrency. We are creating as many goroutines as this number tells us to.

[timvaillancourt]

@deepthi good catch! I think "concurrency" is also misleading because all workers aren't guaranteed to be doing any work

I've renamed this to --discovery-workers which I think tells the story better. Please merge if you agree