refactor(frontend): separate operator state and statistics in WorkflowStatusService

[PG1204]

What changes were proposed in this PR?

WorkflowStatusService currently bundles two different concepts in one object: OperatorStatistics carries both the operator's execution state (Running, Completed, …) and its statistics (row counts, sizes, timing). This PR splits them into separate sub-concepts, so the service now exposes three cleanly separated things: state, statistics, and performance metrics (the third was already separate, from #5834).

• WorkflowStatusService now has a stream + snapshot pair per concept: getStateUpdateStream() / getCurrentState() for state, and getStatisticsUpdateStream() / getCurrentStatistics() for statistics (metrics only). The performance-metrics API is unchanged.
• OperatorStatistics no longer contains operatorState. The combined shape the engine still sends over the websocket is typed as OperatorRuntimeStatus, and the service splits each update into the two maps. No backend or wire-format changes.
• All consumers are migrated: components that only cared about state (result panel, code debugger, UDF debug service, property editor) now read the state stream; the workflow editor renders state (operator color) and statistics (port counts, worker count) from their own streams. JointUIService.changeOperatorStatistics renders statistics only — state rendering stays in changeOperatorState (its two long-unused isSource/isSink params are dropped along the way).
• A small WorkflowGraph.getAllOperatorIDs() accessor keeps the per-update rendering path from materializing full operator predicates when only IDs are needed.

The change is behavior-preserving. One deliberate exception: the old code applied the "Recovering" display state by mutating the shared emitted map, which leaked masked states to other subscribers depending on subscription order. That accident is removed, and the override is now applied explicitly where state is rendered.

Rebased on top of the merged heat-map overlay (#6213), which consumes only the unchanged performance-metrics stream; its editor wiring is untouched by this refactor.

Any related issues, documentation, discussions?

Closes #5919. Part of umbrella #5772. Follow-up from the review discussion in #5834; follows RFC discussion #5216.

How was this PR tested?

The WorkflowStatusService spec now asserts state and statistics are exposed and update independently, and that statistics never leak operatorState. Consumer specs were updated to the new API, plus new tests for the state-rendering rules in the workflow editor (Uninitialized fallback, Recovering override, state label restored after navigation).

Full frontend suite passes (5,350 tests, 209 files); tsc --noEmit, eslint ./src, and Prettier are all clean.

Was this PR authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?

This PR was co-authored using Claude in compliance with ASF.

[github-actions]

Automated Reviewer Suggestions

Based on the git blame history of the changed files, we recommend the following reviewers:

• Contributors with relevant context: @aglinxinyuan, @mengw15, @Yicong-Huang
  You can notify them by mentioning @aglinxinyuan, @mengw15, @Yicong-Huang in a comment.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 98.24561% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 94.09%. Comparing base (7d57cd6) to head (9a44593).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...onent/workflow-editor/workflow-editor.component.ts	94.11%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main    #8301      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     94.09%   94.09%   -0.01%     
  Complexity     4806     4806              
============================================
  Files          1193     1193              
  Lines         48493    48512      +19     
  Branches       5858     5860       +2     
============================================
+ Hits          45631    45646      +15     
- Misses         1420     1421       +1     
- Partials       1442     1445       +3     

Flag	Coverage Δ		*Carryforward flag
access-control-service	81.00% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 7d57cd6
agent-service	99.32% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 7d57cd6
amber	90.10% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 7d57cd6
computing-unit-managing-service	73.67% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 7d57cd6
config-service	87.00% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 7d57cd6
file-service	87.91% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 7d57cd6
frontend	96.86% <98.24%> (-0.02%)	⬇️
notebook-migration-service	79.31% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 7d57cd6
pyamber	98.18% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 7d57cd6
workflow-compiling-service	77.19% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 7d57cd6

*This pull request uses carry forward flags. Click here to find out more.

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[PG1204]

/request-review @Yicong-Huang