proto: lexical ordering of ExecuteMultiFetchAsDBA

[shlomi-noach]

Description

Quick followup to #15506

This PR introduces no change to functionality. However, it solves a problem with #15506: the new ExecuteMultiFetchAsDBA method, and ExecuteMultiFetchAsDBARequest and ExecuteMultiFetchAsDBAResponse messages, were defined in proto file right after ExecuteFetchAsDBA, but that's incorrect lexically and should have been defined after ExecuteHook.

Lexical ordering matters because autogenerated code works lexically, which causes unwanted diffs.

Related Issue(s)

#15505

Checklist

• "Backport to:" labels have been added if this change should be back-ported to release branches
• If this change is to be back-ported to previous releases, a justification is included in the PR description
• Tests were added or are not required
• Did the new or modified tests pass consistently locally and on CI?
• Documentation was added or is not required

Deployment Notes

[vitess-bot]

Review Checklist

Hello reviewers! 👋 Please follow this checklist when reviewing this Pull Request.

General

• Ensure that the Pull Request has a descriptive title.
• Ensure there is a link to an issue (except for internal cleanup and flaky test fixes), new features should have an RFC that documents use cases and test cases.

Tests

• Bug fixes should have at least one unit or end-to-end test, enhancement and new features should have a sufficient number of tests.

Documentation

• Apply the release notes (needs details) label if users need to know about this change.
• New features should be documented.
• There should be some code comments as to why things are implemented the way they are.
• There should be a comment at the top of each new or modified test to explain what the test does.

New flags

• Is this flag really necessary?
• Flag names must be clear and intuitive, use dashes (-), and have a clear help text.

If a workflow is added or modified:

• Each item in Jobs should be named in order to mark it as required.
• If the workflow needs to be marked as required, the maintainer team must be notified.

Backward compatibility

• Protobuf changes should be wire-compatible.
• Changes to _vt tables and RPCs need to be backward compatible.
• RPC changes should be compatible with vitess-operator
• If a flag is removed, then it should also be removed from vitess-operator and arewefastyet, if used there.
• vtctl command output order should be stable and awk-able.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 0% with 6 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 65.74%. Comparing base (696fe0e) to head (fcdfcad).
Report is 145 commits behind head on main.

Files	Patch %	Lines
go/vt/vtctl/grpcvtctldclient/client_gen.go	0.00%	4 Missing ⚠️
go/vt/vtctl/localvtctldclient/client_gen.go	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #15558      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   67.41%   65.74%   -1.67%     
==========================================
  Files        1560     1560              
  Lines      192752   194595    +1843     
==========================================
- Hits       129952   127945    -2007     
- Misses      62800    66650    +3850     

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