With PostgreSQL, the `argo_archived_workflows.workflow` column has been
of type `json` ever since 8a1e611,
which was released as v2.5.0. Therefore, the `::json` casts do nothing,
and prevent users from improving performance by migrating to JSONB using the following query:
```sql
alter table argo_archived_workflows alter column workflow set data type jsonb using workflow::jsonb
```

Without the changes in this PR, running the above will massively slow
down the queries, because casting JSONB to JSON is expensive. With the
changes in this PR, it improves performance by ~80%, which I determined
by running the benchmarks added in
argoproj#13767 against a DB with
100,000 randomly generated workflows generated by
argoproj#13715:
```
$ benchstat postgres_before_10000_workflows.txt postgres_after_10000_workflows.txt
goos: linux
goarch: amd64
pkg: github.com/argoproj/argo-workflows/v3/test/e2e
cpu: 12th Gen Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-12400
                                                     │ postgres_before_10000_workflows.txt │  postgres_after_10000_workflows.txt   │
                                                     │               sec/op                │    sec/op     vs base                 │
WorkflowArchive/ListWorkflows-12                                             185.81m ± ∞ ¹   25.06m ± ∞ ¹        ~ (p=1.000 n=1) ²
WorkflowArchive/ListWorkflows_with_label_selector-12                         186.35m ± ∞ ¹   25.99m ± ∞ ¹        ~ (p=1.000 n=1) ²
WorkflowArchive/CountWorkflows-12                                             42.39m ± ∞ ¹   11.78m ± ∞ ¹        ~ (p=1.000 n=1) ²
geomean                                                                       113.6m         19.72m        -82.64%
¹ need >= 6 samples for confidence interval at level 0.95
² need >= 4 samples to detect a difference at alpha level 0.05
```

The only downside to migrating to JSONB is it can take a long time
if you've got a ton of workflows (~72s on my local DB with 100,000
workflows). I'll enter a separate PR for the migration, but I'm entering
this change separately so it can hopefully go out in 3.6.0.

Signed-off-by: Mason Malone <651224+MasonM@users.noreply.github.com>

…j#13601

As explained in
argoproj#13601 (comment),
I believe argoproj#12912
introduced a performance regression when listing workflows for
PostgreSQL users. Reverting that PR could re-introduce the memory issues
mentioned in the PR description, so instead this mitigates the impact by
converting the `workflow` column to be of type `jsonb`.

Initially `workflow` was of type `text`, and was migrated to `json` in
argoproj#2152. I'm not sure why
`jsonb` wasn't chosen, but [based on this comment in the linked
issue](argoproj#2133 (comment)),
I think it was simply an oversight. Here's the relevant docs
(https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/datatype-json.html):

> The json and jsonb data types accept almost identical sets of values as input. The major practical difference is one of efficiency. The json data type stores an exact copy of the input text, which processing functions must reparse on each execution; while jsonb data is stored in a decomposed binary format that makes it slightly slower to input due to added conversion overhead, but significantly faster to process, since no reparsing is needed. jsonb also supports indexing, which can be a significant advantage.
>
> Because the json type stores an exact copy of the input text, it will preserve semantically-insignificant white space between tokens, as well as the order of keys within JSON objects. Also, if a JSON object within the value contains the same key more than once, all the key/value pairs are kept. (The processing functions consider the last value as the operative one.) By contrast, jsonb does not preserve white space, does not preserve the order of object keys, and does not keep duplicate object keys. If duplicate keys are specified in the input, only the last value is kept.
>
> In general, most applications should prefer to store JSON data as jsonb, unless there are quite specialized needs, such as legacy assumptions about ordering of object keys.

I'm pretty sure we don't care about key order or whitespace. We do care
somewhat about insertion speed, but archived workflows are read much
more frequently than written, so a slight reduction in write speed that
gives a large improvement in read speed is a good tradeoff.

Here's steps to test this:
1. Use argoproj#13715 to generate 100,000 randomized workflows, with https://gist.github.com/MasonM/52932ff6644c3c0ccea9e847780bfd90 as a template:

     ```
     $ time go run ./hack/db fake-archived-workflows  --template "@very-large-workflow.yaml" --rows 100000
     Using seed 1935828722624432788
     Clusters: [default]
     Namespaces: [argo]
     Inserted 100000 rows

     real    18m35.316s
     user    3m2.447s
     sys     0m44.972s
     ```
2. Run the benchmarks using argoproj#13767:
    ```
    make BenchmarkWorkflowArchive > postgres_before_10000_workflows.txt
    ```
3. Run the migration the DB CLI:
    ```
    $ time go run ./hack/db migrate
    INFO[0000] Migrating database schema                     clusterName=default dbType=postgres
    INFO[0000] applying database change                      change="alter table argo_archived_workflows alter column workflow set data type jsonb using workflow::jsonb" changeSchemaVersion=60
    2024/10/17 18:07:42     Session ID:     00001
            Query:          alter table argo_archived_workflows alter column workflow set data type jsonb using workflow::jsonb
            Stack:
                    fmt.(*pp).handleMethods@/usr/local/go/src/fmt/print.go:673
                    fmt.(*pp).printArg@/usr/local/go/src/fmt/print.go:756
                    fmt.(*pp).doPrint@/usr/local/go/src/fmt/print.go:1208
                    fmt.Append@/usr/local/go/src/fmt/print.go:289
                    log.(*Logger).Print.func1@/usr/local/go/src/log/log.go:261
                    log.(*Logger).output@/usr/local/go/src/log/log.go:238
                    log.(*Logger).Print@/usr/local/go/src/log/log.go:260
                    github.com/argoproj/argo-workflows/v3/persist/sqldb.ansiSQLChange.apply@/home/vscode/go/src/github.com/argoproj/argo-workflows/persist/sqldb/ansi_sql_change.go:11
                    github.com/argoproj/argo-workflows/v3/persist/sqldb.migrate.applyChange.func1@/home/vscode/go/src/github.com/argoproj/argo-workflows/persist/sqldb/migrate.go:295
                    github.com/argoproj/argo-workflows/v3/persist/sqldb.migrate.applyChange@/home/vscode/go/src/github.com/argoproj/argo-workflows/persist/sqldb/migrate.go:284
                    github.com/argoproj/argo-workflows/v3/persist/sqldb.migrate.Exec@/home/vscode/go/src/github.com/argoproj/argo-workflows/persist/sqldb/migrate.go:273
                    main.NewMigrateCommand.func1@/home/vscode/go/src/github.com/argoproj/argo-workflows/hack/db/main.go:50
                    github.com/spf13/cobra.(*Command).execute@/home/vscode/go/pkg/mod/github.com/spf13/cobra@v1.8.1/command.go:985
                    github.com/spf13/cobra.(*Command).ExecuteC@/home/vscode/go/pkg/mod/github.com/spf13/cobra@v1.8.1/command.go:1117
                    github.com/spf13/cobra.(*Command).Execute@/home/vscode/go/pkg/mod/github.com/spf13/cobra@v1.8.1/command.go:1041
                    main.main@/home/vscode/go/src/github.com/argoproj/argo-workflows/hack/db/main.go:39
                    runtime.main@/usr/local/go/src/runtime/proc.go:272
                    runtime.goexit@/usr/local/go/src/runtime/asm_amd64.s:1700
            Rows affected:  0
            Error:          upper: slow query
            Time taken:     69.12755s
            Context:        context.Background

    real    1m10.087s
    user    0m1.541s
    sys     0m0.410s
    ```
2. Re-run the benchmarks:
    ```
    make BenchmarkWorkflowArchive > postgres_after_10000_workflows.txt
    ```
4. Compare results using [benchstat](https://pkg.go.dev/golang.org/x/perf/cmd/benchstat):
    ```
    $ benchstat postgres_before_10000_workflows3.txt postgres_after_10000_workflows2.txt
    goos: linux
    goarch: amd64
    pkg: github.com/argoproj/argo-workflows/v3/test/e2e
    cpu: 12th Gen Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-12400
                                                         │ postgres_before_10000_workflows3.txt │  postgres_after_10000_workflows2.txt  │
                                                         │                sec/op                │    sec/op     vs base                 │
    WorkflowArchive/ListWorkflows-12                                              183.83m ± ∞ ¹   24.69m ± ∞ ¹        ~ (p=1.000 n=1) ²
    WorkflowArchive/ListWorkflows_with_label_selector-12                          192.71m ± ∞ ¹   25.87m ± ∞ ¹        ~ (p=1.000 n=1) ²
    WorkflowArchive/CountWorkflows-12                                              13.04m ± ∞ ¹   11.75m ± ∞ ¹        ~ (p=1.000 n=1) ²
    geomean                                                                        77.31m         19.58m        -74.68%
    ¹ need >= 6 samples for confidence interval at level 0.95
    ² need >= 4 samples to detect a difference at alpha level 0.05

                                                         │ postgres_before_10000_workflows3.txt │  postgres_after_10000_workflows2.txt  │
                                                         │                 B/op                 │     B/op       vs base                │
    WorkflowArchive/ListWorkflows-12                                              497.2Ki ± ∞ ¹   497.5Ki ± ∞ ¹       ~ (p=1.000 n=1) ²
    WorkflowArchive/ListWorkflows_with_label_selector-12                          503.1Ki ± ∞ ¹   503.9Ki ± ∞ ¹       ~ (p=1.000 n=1) ²
    WorkflowArchive/CountWorkflows-12                                             8.972Ki ± ∞ ¹   8.899Ki ± ∞ ¹       ~ (p=1.000 n=1) ²
    geomean                                                                       130.9Ki         130.7Ki        -0.20%
    ¹ need >= 6 samples for confidence interval at level 0.95
    ² need >= 4 samples to detect a difference at alpha level 0.05

                                                         │ postgres_before_10000_workflows3.txt │ postgres_after_10000_workflows2.txt  │
                                                         │              allocs/op               │  allocs/op    vs base                │
    WorkflowArchive/ListWorkflows-12                                               8.373k ± ∞ ¹   8.370k ± ∞ ¹       ~ (p=1.000 n=1) ²
    WorkflowArchive/ListWorkflows_with_label_selector-12                           8.410k ± ∞ ¹   8.406k ± ∞ ¹       ~ (p=1.000 n=1) ²
    WorkflowArchive/CountWorkflows-12                                               212.0 ± ∞ ¹    212.0 ± ∞ ¹       ~ (p=1.000 n=1) ³
    geomean                                                                        2.462k         2.462k        -0.03%
    ¹ need >= 6 samples for confidence interval at level 0.95
    ² need >= 4 samples to detect a difference at alpha level 0.05
    ³ all samples are equal
    ```

Signed-off-by: Mason Malone <651224+MasonM@users.noreply.github.com>

Signed-off-by: Mason Malone <651224+MasonM@users.noreply.github.com>