[Refactor] Hide AUTO refresh mode from user surface

[Youngwb]

Why I'm doing:

What I'm doing:

AUTO is intentionally not exposed to users; the implementation is preserved internally and will be revived in a later phase. This change rejects user-facing input of refresh_mode = "auto" on both CREATE and ALTER paths, while leaving the internal AUTO machinery (RefreshMode.AUTO enum, MVHybridRefreshProcessor, etc.) fully intact.

Production:

• IVMAnalyzer.getRefreshMode (CREATE path): reject "auto" with a clear SemanticException. Tighten error reporting for any invalid refresh_mode value.
• PropertyAnalyzer.analyzeRefreshMode (ALTER path): reject "auto" with the same message. Update the error to list only the supported values (INCREMENTAL, PCT) instead of the full enum.
• AlterMVJobExecutor.alterMVRefreshMode: idempotency check now also considers the in-memory currentRefreshMode, not just the persisted property. Without this, an ALTER could no-op when the two are out of sync, leaving the in-memory mode stale.

Tests:

• MVTestBase.createMaterializedViewWithRefreshMode: add a test-only bypass for "auto" — create through the SQL path with INCREMENTAL (which exercises the IVMAnalyzer the same way), then promote the in-memory currentRefreshMode to AUTO. If the query is not IVM-eligible, fall back to PCT, mirroring real AUTO behavior. The persisted property remains "incremental" so DDL regeneration during ALTER ACTIVE does not feed "auto" back through the analyzer.
• Update unit tests where ALTER to "auto" was expected to succeed; they now expect failure with the mode unchanged.
• Add explicit rejection tests for CREATE and ALTER.
• Skip 3 SQL integration tests that exercise AUTO end-to-end through SQL (test_ivm_with_iceberg_{auto,delete,expire_snapshots}). Files remain on disk so they can be revived when AUTO ships in a later phase.

Fixes #issue

What type of PR is this:

• BugFix
• Feature
• Enhancement
• Refactor
• UT
• Doc
• Tool

Does this PR entail a change in behavior?

• Yes, this PR will result in a change in behavior.
• No, this PR will not result in a change in behavior.

If yes, please specify the type of change:

• Interface/UI changes: syntax, type conversion, expression evaluation, display information
• Parameter changes: default values, similar parameters but with different default values
• Policy changes: use new policy to replace old one, functionality automatically enabled
• Feature removed
• Miscellaneous: upgrade & downgrade compatibility, etc.

Checklist:

• I have added test cases for my bug fix or my new feature
• This pr needs user documentation (for new or modified features or behaviors)
  • I have added documentation for my new feature or new function
  • This pr needs auto generate documentation
• This is a backport pr

Bugfix cherry-pick branch check:

• I have checked the version labels which the pr will be auto-backported to the target branch
  • 4.1
  • 4.0
  • 3.5
  • 3.4

[CelerData-Reviewer]

@codex review

[CelerData-Reviewer]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 436fcffebc

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[github-actions]

[Java-Extensions Incremental Coverage Report]

✅ pass : 0 / 0 (0%)

[github-actions]

[FE Incremental Coverage Report]

❌ fail : 11 / 14 (78.57%)

file detail

	path	covered_line	new_line	coverage	not_covered_line_detail
🔵	com/starrocks/sql/analyzer/mv/IVMAnalyzer.java	5	7	71.43%	[347, 348]
🔵	com/starrocks/common/util/PropertyAnalyzer.java	4	5	80.00%	[730]
🔵	com/starrocks/alter/AlterMVJobExecutor.java	2	2	100.00%	[]

[github-actions]

[BE Incremental Coverage Report]

✅ pass : 0 / 0 (0%)

[Youngwb]

@mergify backport branch-4.1

[mergify]

backport branch-4.1

✅ Backports have been created

Details

• #72343 [Refactor] Hide AUTO refresh mode from user surface (backport #72313) has been created for branch branch-4.1 but encountered conflicts

Cherry-pick of 9668fe7 has failed:

On branch mergify/bp/branch-4.1/pr-72313
Your branch is up to date with 'origin/branch-4.1'.

You are currently cherry-picking commit 9668fe7c2e.
  (fix conflicts and run "git cherry-pick --continue")
  (use "git cherry-pick --skip" to skip this patch)
  (use "git cherry-pick --abort" to cancel the cherry-pick operation)

Changes to be committed:
	modified:   fe/fe-core/src/main/java/com/starrocks/alter/AlterMVJobExecutor.java
	modified:   fe/fe-core/src/main/java/com/starrocks/common/util/PropertyAnalyzer.java
	modified:   fe/fe-core/src/main/java/com/starrocks/sql/analyzer/mv/IVMAnalyzer.java
	modified:   fe/fe-core/src/test/java/com/starrocks/sql/optimizer/rule/transformation/materialization/MVTestBase.java
	modified:   test/lib/skip.py

Unmerged paths:
  (use "git add <file>..." to mark resolution)
	both modified:   fe/fe-core/src/test/java/com/starrocks/alter/AlterMaterializedViewTest.java
	both modified:   fe/fe-core/src/test/java/com/starrocks/analysis/RefreshMaterializedViewTest.java

To fix up this pull request, you can check it out locally. See documentation: https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/collaborating-with-pull-requests/reviewing-changes-in-pull-requests/checking-out-pull-requests-locally