Add CI for VTop example

[GuptaManan100]

Description

When we fixed the Vtop example in Vitess last time at #10687, we also tried to run it on CI, but unfortunately, the CI didn't have enough power to run them. Since then we've gotten access to 16 cor runners, and it is now possible to run the Vtop workflow.

Related Issue(s)

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

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 67.16%. Comparing base (9c9a893) to head (e3ef5d7).

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #16007      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   67.17%   67.16%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files        1571     1571              
  Lines      252249   252247       -2     
==========================================
- Hits       169459   169411      -48     
- Misses      82790    82836      +46     

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

[GuptaManan100]

Even on the 16 core machines, the vttablets aren't reaching a ready state -

Warning  Unhealthy  72s (x713 over 21m)  kubelet            Readiness probe failed: dial tcp 10.244.0.20:3306: connect: connection refused

Even though the test works locally perfectly.

[github-actions]

This PR is being marked as stale because it has been open for 30 days with no activity. To rectify, you may do any of the following:

• Push additional commits to the associated branch.
• Remove the stale label.
• Add a comment indicating why it is not stale.

If no action is taken within 7 days, this PR will be closed.

[github-actions]

This PR was closed because it has been stale for 7 days with no activity.

[mattlord]

Any reason not to use kubectl flags to get what we want rather than grep, head, and awk? That would be better IMO.

[mattlord]

I think we just need to merge in origin/main rather than doing this here.