json, expression: implicitly convert JSON string to time types

[YangKeao]

What problem does this PR solve?

Issue Number: close #53243, close #53352

Problem Summary:

Two problem:

1. TiDB didn't allow inserting json string as an item of DATE/DATETIME/TIMESTAMP array.
2. TiDB didn't use the correct fsp when converting JSON to DATE/DATETIME/TIMESTAMP.

What changed and how does it work?

1. Implicitly converting JSON string to DATE/DATETIME/TIMESTAMP when we are converting them to DATE/DATETIME/TIMESTAMP array.
2. Deprecate the original method GetTime which uses the DefaultFsp, and implement a new method on BinaryJSON to return types.Time with the provided Fsp.

Check List

Tests

• Unit test
• Integration test
• Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below)
• No need to test

  • I checked and no code files have been changed.

Side effects

• Performance regression: Consumes more CPU
• Performance regression: Consumes more Memory
• Breaking backward compatibility

Documentation

• Affects user behaviors
• Contains syntax changes
• Contains variable changes
• Contains experimental features
• Changes MySQL compatibility

Release note

Please refer to Release Notes Language Style Guide to write a quality release note.

Fix the issue that JSON string array cannot be converted to DATE/DATETIME/TIMESTAMP array.
Fix the issue that when converting JSON to DATE/DATETIME/TIMESTAMP, the precision is ignored.

[ti-chi-bot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by:
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign windtalker for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS
• pkg/expression/OWNERS

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[YangKeao]

/hold

I remembered another issue: #50370. I need to check whether this PR will bring some potential correctness issue later 🤔 .

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 95.23810% with 1 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 74.5644%. Comparing base (1c4a9c6) to head (6abc68d).
Report is 46 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@               Coverage Diff                @@
##             master     #53363        +/-   ##
================================================
+ Coverage   72.4996%   74.5644%   +2.0647%     
================================================
  Files          1505       1505                
  Lines        429646     430456       +810     
================================================
+ Hits         311492     320967      +9475     
+ Misses        98849      89563      -9286     
- Partials      19305      19926       +621     

Flag	Coverage Δ
integration	49.2237% <85.7142%> (?)
unit	71.3363% <80.9523%> (-0.0627%)	⬇️

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

Components	Coverage Δ
dumpling	53.9957% <ø> (ø)
parser	∅ <ø> (∅)
br	50.3892% <ø> (+8.9648%)	⬆️

[YangKeao]

/retest

[tiprow]

@YangKeao: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name	Commit	Details	Required	Rerun command
fast_test_tiprow	6abc68d	link	true	/test fast_test_tiprow

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.