[SPARK-34950][TESTS] Update benchmark results to the ones created by GitHub Actions machines

[HyukjinKwon]

What changes were proposed in this pull request?

#32015 added a way to run benchmarks much more easily in the same GitHub Actions build. This PR updates the benchmark results by using the way.

NOTE that looks like GitHub Actions use four types of CPU given my observations:

• Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8171M CPU @ 2.60GHz
• Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2673 v4 @ 2.30GHz
• Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2673 v3 @ 2.40GHz
• Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8272CL CPU @ 2.60GHz

Given my quick research, seems like they perform roughly similarly:

I couldn't find enough information about Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8272CL CPU @ 2.60GHz but the performance seems roughly similar given the numbers.

So shouldn't be a big deal especially given that this way is much easier, encourages contributors to run more and guarantee the same number of cores and same memory with the same softwares.

Why are the changes needed?

To have a base line of the benchmarks accordingly.

Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?

No, dev-only.

How was this patch tested?

It was generated from:

• Run benchmarks: * (JDK 11)
• Run benchmarks: * (JDK 8)

[SparkQA]

Kubernetes integration test starting
URL: https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder-K8s/41459/

[SparkQA]

Kubernetes integration test status success
URL: https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder-K8s/41459/

[SparkQA]

Test build #136883 has finished for PR 32044 at commit 33f2ebe.

• This patch fails PySpark unit tests.
• This patch merges cleanly.
• This patch adds no public classes.

[MaxGekk]

regression by 2 times?

[MaxGekk]

regression by 2 times

[MaxGekk]

+1, LGTM. The PR updates only benchmark results. The failed GA are not related to this PR. Merging to master.
Thank you @HyukjinKwon , and @wangyum @dongjoon-hyun for your reviews.

[LuciferYang]

@HyukjinKwon Can we use this way to generate the benchmarks results with Java 17?

On the other hand, I found some benchmarks do not have corresponding Java 11 result files, such as UpdateFieldsBenchmark and CharVarcharBenchmark, Is this expected?

[LuciferYang]

@HyukjinKwon Can we use this way to generate the benchmarks results with Java 17?

Let me study #32015 first. Should all new benchmarks results need generate in this way?

[HyukjinKwon]

Yes, they all should generate the files for JDK 11. If they don't, it's a bug.

Yes, we should have another set of these benchmark result files for JDK 17 separately

[LuciferYang]

Thank you for your explanation