fix(meta): display distinct dedup tables in dashboard

[stdrc]

I hereby agree to the terms of the RisingWave Labs, Inc. Contributor License Agreement.

What's changed and what's your intention?

As title.

Checklist

• I have written necessary rustdoc comments
• I have added necessary unit tests and integration tests
• I have added fuzzing tests or opened an issue to track them. (Optional, recommended for new SQL features).
• I have demonstrated that backward compatibility is not broken by breaking changes and created issues to track deprecated features to be removed in the future. (Please refer to the issue)
• All checks passed in ./risedev check (or alias, ./risedev c)

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #7948 (764c52b) into main (2541ec6) will increase coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is 23.07%.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #7948   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   71.69%   71.69%           
=======================================
  Files        1116     1116           
  Lines      179341   179364   +23     
=======================================
+ Hits       128571   128589   +18     
- Misses      50770    50775    +5     

Flag	Coverage Δ
rust	71.69% <23.07%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️

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

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/meta/src/stream/stream_graph/visit.rs	54.38% <20.00%> (-3.71%)	⬇️
...rc/optimizer/plan_node/stream_global_simple_agg.rs	74.19% <25.00%> (-4.88%)	⬇️
...rontend/src/optimizer/plan_node/stream_hash_agg.rs	77.00% <25.00%> (-4.73%)	⬇️
src/storage/src/hummock/sstable_store.rs	65.31% <0.00%> (+0.15%)	⬆️
src/storage/src/hummock/compactor/mod.rs	80.88% <0.00%> (+0.19%)	⬆️
src/storage/src/hummock/compactor/iterator.rs	98.24% <0.00%> (+0.29%)	⬆️
src/object_store/src/object/mem.rs	87.25% <0.00%> (+0.38%)	⬆️
src/batch/src/executor/group_top_n.rs	74.70% <0.00%> (+6.47%)	⬆️

📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more

[st1page]

LGTM

[BugenZhao]

How could it work without assigning a global table ID before this PR? 🥵

[stdrc]

It doesn't show up in the dashboard and seems no other place will access the table id (

[BugenZhao]

If the table ID is local for each fragment graph (mview), then tables from multiple views may get conflicted. (note that we use the table id as the storage prefix) 😄 I guess it'll be better to assign a range, for example, from 1000, for global table IDs, then we can check it out earlier. Not a big deal.