chore: Remove obsolete legacy visualizations

[john-bodley]

SUMMARY

@michael-s-molina apologies for all the churn, but I'm unable to re-open #24671 in GitHub as the branch has been forced pushed after the PR was closed.

Delving a little deeper into the annotation logic I was able to rework the logic in said PR in order for the Cypress tests to pass., i.e., this PR is a superset (no pun intended) of #24671 . Thankfully means that we're able to remove the TableViz visualization type which simplifies the visualization logic, i.e., now every chart is defined as either a legacy chart or a non-legacy chart but not both.

BEFORE/AFTER SCREENSHOTS OR ANIMATED GIF

TESTING INSTRUCTIONS

CI.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

• Has associated issue:
• Required feature flags:
• Changes UI
• Includes DB Migration (follow approval process in SIP-59)
  • Migration is atomic, supports rollback & is backwards-compatible
  • Confirm DB migration upgrade and downgrade tested
  • Runtime estimates and downtime expectations provided
• Introduces new feature or API
• Removes existing feature or API

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #24694 (9eec52f) into master (0328dd2) will decrease coverage by 0.08%.
The diff coverage is 7.40%.

❗ Current head 9eec52f differs from pull request most recent head 155c6a8. Consider uploading reports for the commit 155c6a8 to get more accurate results

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #24694      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   68.97%   68.89%   -0.08%     
==========================================
  Files        1901     1901              
  Lines       74008    73927      -81     
  Branches     8183     8183              
==========================================
- Hits        51047    50932     -115     
- Misses      20840    20874      +34     
  Partials     2121     2121              

Flag	Coverage Δ
hive	54.15% <7.40%> (+0.03%)	⬆️
mysql	79.21% <7.40%> (-0.15%)	⬇️
postgres	79.29% <7.40%> (-0.15%)	⬇️
presto	54.05% <7.40%> (+0.03%)	⬆️
python	83.31% <7.40%> (-0.14%)	⬇️
sqlite	77.88% <7.40%> (-0.15%)	⬇️
unit	54.87% <7.40%> (+0.03%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
superset/examples/birth_names.py	69.69% <ø> (ø)
superset/viz.py	64.51% <ø> (-2.39%)	⬇️
superset/common/query_context_processor.py	85.13% <7.40%> (-4.83%)	⬇️

... and 2 files with indirect coverage changes

📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more

[john-bodley]

Same logic was previously but indented.

[john-bodley]

The QueryObject has both time_range and (from_dttm, to_dttm) but I was only able to get the annotation override to adhere to the later.

[john-bodley]

@michael-s-molina even though you were able to run the Celery tests locally without issue, after a few tweaks (increasing timeouts to address the performance degradation on M1 silica) I was able to see the following error:

I don't fully grok where/when the query context is persisted (the only place I could see where the query context was generated from the payload/form-data was via the /api/chart/v1//data/ RESTful API GET endpoint), but it does seem the existence of query context seemed somewhat sporadic. Maybe @villebro can provide more insights in terms of how/where this is generated/persisted as in the example data currently only the "Pivot Table v2" chart (per the slices.query_context column) has the query context explicitly defined yet there are swaths of non-legacy charts.

The TL;DR is similar to the "Pivot Table v2" chart when I explicitly added the query context for the "Daily Totals" chart (which backs the annotation layer in the Cypress test which was failing) the test passed.

[michael-s-molina]

LGTM. Thank you for the cleanup.