[Refactor] add a config to ignore rpc overcrowded problem (backport #47332)

[mergify]

Why I'm doing:

If the amount of data to be sent by a single channel of brpc exceeds brpc_socket_max_unwritten_bytes
it will cause rpc to report an error. We add configuration to ignore rpc overload.
This may cause process memory usage to rise.
In the future we need to count the memory on each channel of the rpc. To do application layer rpc flow limiting.

What I'm doing:

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
  • 3.3
  • 3.2
  • 3.1
  • 3.0
  • 2.5

---

This is an automatic backport of pull request #47332 done by [Mergify](https://mergify.com). ## Why I'm doing: If the amount of data to be sent by a single channel of brpc exceeds brpc_socket_max_unwritten_bytes it will cause rpc to report an error. We add configuration to ignore rpc overload. This may cause process memory usage to rise. In the future we need to count the memory on each channel of the rpc. To do application layer rpc flow limiting.

What I'm doing:

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

[mergify]

Cherry-pick of ea923b7 has failed:

On branch mergify/bp/branch-2.5/pr-47332
Your branch is up to date with 'origin/branch-2.5'.

You are currently cherry-picking commit ea923b75aa.
  (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:   be/src/exec/pipeline/exchange/sink_buffer.cpp
	modified:   be/src/service/brpc.h
	modified:   be/src/storage/segment_replicate_executor.cpp

Unmerged paths:
  (use "git add/rm <file>..." as appropriate to mark resolution)
	both modified:   be/src/common/config.h
	deleted by us:   be/src/exec/dictionary_cache_writer.cpp
	deleted by us:   be/src/exec/tablet_sink_index_channel.cpp

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

[mergify]

@mergify[bot]: Backport conflict, please reslove the conflict and resubmit the pr