[BugFix] Record audit stats for async materialized view refresh

[spaces-X]

Why I'm doing:

Close #74942

Async materialized view refresh audit-log entries lost the CpuCostNs / MemCostBytes / ScanBytes / ScanRows fields. This is a regression introduced by #56257, which centralized audit-stats writing into StmtExecutor.recordExecStatsIntoContext() (only called from
execute() / executeStmtWithExecPlan() / executeStmtWithResultQueue()) and removed the old fallback in ConnectProcessor.auditAfterExec().

MV refresh does not go through execute(): it calls executor.handleDMLStmtWithProfile() directly, so recordExecStatsIntoContext() is never invoked and the statistics never reach the audit-event builder, even though the data is available via
executor.getQueryStatisticsForAuditLog().

What I'm doing:

Flush exec statistics into the audit-event builder on the MV-refresh path before auditAfterExec, mirroring what execute() does in its finally block. recordExecStatsIntoContext() is made public (it lives in qe, the caller in scheduler).

It is intentionally not placed inside handleDMLStmtWithProfile(): execute() also calls handleDMLStmtWithProfile() and then calls recordExecStatsIntoContext() in its own finally, so flushing inside handleDMLStmtWithProfile() would double-count for normal
INSERTs (the builder uses accumulating add*). The MV-refresh path uses a fresh ConnectContext whose builder starts at the default -1, so a single explicit call is correct and not double-counted.

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 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
  • 3.3

[CelerData-Reviewer]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Delightful!

Reviewed commit: 4fed4671c1

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]

✅ pass : 1 / 1 (100.00%)

file detail

	path	covered_line	new_line	coverage	not_covered_line_detail
🔵	com/starrocks/scheduler/MVTaskRunProcessor.java	1	1	100.00%	[]

[github-actions]

[BE Incremental Coverage Report]

✅ pass : 0 / 0 (0%)