fix date_bin overflows scaling extreme Timestamp(Second) source

[xiedeyantu]

Which issue does this PR close?

• Closes panic: date_bin overflows scaling extreme Timestamp(Second) source #22211.

Rationale for this change

date_bin could panic during planning or constant evaluation when scaling a non-nanosecond source timestamp to nanoseconds overflowed. This change makes that path return a regular error instead of panicking.

What changes are included in this PR?

• Added checked overflow handling for source timestamp scaling in date_bin.
• Return an error for out-of-range source timestamp conversion instead of panicking.
• Preserved existing NULL behavior for unrelated out-of-range date_bin cases.
• Added Rust unit test and sqllogictest coverage for the overflow case.

Are these changes tested?

Yes.

Verified with:

• cargo test -p datafusion-functions test_date_bin --lib
• cargo test -p datafusion-sqllogictest --test sqllogictests date_bin_errors

Are there any user-facing changes?

Yes. Queries that previously could panic now return a normal error:

Execution error: DATE_BIN source timestamp ... cannot be represented in nanoseconds

[nathanb9]

ArrowError::ComputeError("Execution error: DATE_BIN source timestamp...") gets wrapped a second time into DataFusionError::Execution(...) which i htink will produce the triple nested message.

[nathanb9]

Could you add simple test for the array path?
just like:

  let input = TimestampSecondArray::from(vec![Some(i64::MAX)]);
  let args = vec![
      ColumnarValue::Scalar(ScalarValue::IntervalMonthDayNano(...)),
      ColumnarValue::Array(Arc::new(input)),
      ColumnarValue::Scalar(ScalarValue::TimestampNanosecond(Some(0), None)),
  ];
  let res = invoke_date_bin_with_args(args, 1, return_field);
  assert!(res.err().unwrap().strip_backtrace().contains(
      "DATE_BIN source timestamp 9223372036854775807 cannot be represented in nanoseconds"
  ));

related to first comment because this might help clear up what you expect the result to look like

[xiedeyantu]

@nathanb9 Thanks for your review. All comments have been revised according to your suggestions. Please confirm if this is what you expected.

[nathanb9]

I think this is better way to handle it too @xiedeyantu Thanks for fixing quickly.

FYI im not a committer so youll need someone else as well.

[xiedeyantu]

I think this is better way to handle it too @xiedeyantu Thanks for fixing quickly.

FYI im not a committer so youll need someone else as well.

Thanks all the same.