[improvement](cgroup) inactive_file should be treated as available memory to avoid query be cancelled (#64347)

[yiguolei]

]Issue Number: close #xxx

Related PR: #xxx

Problem Summary:

Sometimes we may see this errors in cgroup or k8s environment. Allocator sys memory check failed: Cannot alloc:5343, ...,process memory used 85.41 GB exceed limit 108.00 GB or sys available memory 5.88 GB less than low water mark 6.00 GB.
The mem_limit term is false (85.41 < 108). The 5343-byte allocation is rejected only by sys available memory 5.88 GB < low water mark 6.00 GB. 5.88 GiB available implies cgroup_mem_usage of about 114 GiB, roughly 29 GiB above process memory used (85.41 GiB); that gap is unmapped read page cache. The kernel reclaims clean page cache before OOM, so the memory is available, but Doris cannot reclaim it and the rejection repeats on later allocations. (low water mark 6.00 GB is the default: min(120 - 108, 120 * 5%) = 6.)

Before this PR, cgroup_mem_usage = memory.current - inactive_file - slab_reclaimable. So some active files page cache is not treated as recycleable memory. So cgroup_mem_usage is a bit larger than RSS.

None

• Test

  • Regression test
  • Unit Test
  • Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below)
  • No need to test or manual test. Explain why:

• This is a refactor/code format and no logic has been changed.
  - [ ] Previous test can cover this change. - [ ] No code files have been changed. - [ ] Other reason

• Behavior changed:

  • No.
  • Yes.

• Does this need documentation?

  • No.

• Yes.

• Confirm the release note

• Confirm test cases

• Confirm document

• Add branch pick label

What problem does this PR solve?

Issue Number: close #xxx

Related PR: #xxx

Problem Summary:

Release note

None

Check List (For Author)

• Test

  • Regression test
  • Unit Test
  • Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below)
  • No need to test or manual test. Explain why:
    • This is a refactor/code format and no logic has been changed.
    • Previous test can cover this change.
    • No code files have been changed.
    • Other reason

• Behavior changed:

  • No.
  • Yes.

• Does this need documentation?

  • No.
  • Yes.

Check List (For Reviewer who merge this PR)

• Confirm the release note
• Confirm test cases
• Confirm document
• Add branch pick label

[hello-stephen]

Thank you for your contribution to Apache Doris.
Don't know what should be done next? See How to process your PR.

Please clearly describe your PR:

1. What problem was fixed (it's best to include specific error reporting information). How it was fixed.
2. Which behaviors were modified. What was the previous behavior, what is it now, why was it modified, and what possible impacts might there be.
3. What features were added. Why was this function added?
4. Which code was refactored and why was this part of the code refactored?
5. Which functions were optimized and what is the difference before and after the optimization?

[yiguolei]

run buildall

[hello-stephen]

BE Regression && UT Coverage Report

Increment line coverage 13.79% (4/29) 🎉

Increment coverage report
Complete coverage report

Category	Coverage
Function Coverage	71.44% (25513/35711)
Line Coverage	54.29% (270352/497975)
Region Coverage	51.84% (223885/431918)
Branch Coverage	53.25% (96373/180971)