branch-4.1 [opt](nerieds) PhysicalOlapScan and PhysicalFileScan should print its id in plan (#62509)

[englefly]

pick #62576

What problem does this PR solve?

Issue Number: close #xxx

Related PR: #xxx

Problem Summary:

Release note

None

Check List (For Author)

• Test

  • Regression test
  • Unit Test
  • Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below)
  • No need to test or manual test. Explain why:
    • This is a refactor/code format and no logic has been changed.
    • Previous test can cover this change.
    • No code files have been changed.
    • Other reason

• Behavior changed:

  • No.
  • Yes.

• Does this need documentation?

  • No.
  • Yes.

Check List (For Reviewer who merge this PR)

• Confirm the release note
• Confirm test cases
• Confirm document
• Add branch pick label

[englefly]

run buildall

[hello-stephen]

Thank you for your contribution to Apache Doris.
Don't know what should be done next? See How to process your PR.

Please clearly describe your PR:

1. What problem was fixed (it's best to include specific error reporting information). How it was fixed.
2. Which behaviors were modified. What was the previous behavior, what is it now, why was it modified, and what possible impacts might there be.
3. What features were added. Why was this function added?
4. Which code was refactored and why was this part of the code refactored?
5. Which functions were optimized and what is the difference before and after the optimization?

[englefly]

run buildall

[hello-stephen]

FE Regression Coverage Report

Increment line coverage 80.00% (4/5) 🎉
Increment coverage report
Complete coverage report

[hello-stephen]

FE UT Coverage Report

Increment line coverage 80.00% (4/5) 🎉
Increment coverage report
Complete coverage report

[englefly]

run buildall

[englefly]

run buildall

[hello-stephen]

FE Regression Coverage Report

Increment line coverage 22.22% (4/18) 🎉
Increment coverage report
Complete coverage report

[englefly]

run external

[englefly]

/review

[github-actions]

Review opinion: approve.

Critical checkpoints:

• Existing inline review threads: read; none were present, so there are no duplicate concerns to avoid.
• User focus points: read; no additional focus was provided, and no extra issue was found in that area.
• Repository instructions: checked AGENTS.md; the Nereids expression-specific checkLegalityBeforeTypeCoercion rule is not applicable to these changed files.
• Correctness: the actual GitHub PR diff only changes physical scan string formatting to print plan ids and preserves table/index/partition information in the toSqlString fields; I did not find a behavioral correctness regression.
• Tests: the partitionRowCount assertion was adjusted to avoid depending on unstable plan ids while still checking the relevant table/partition row-count output. No failing inline issue identified.

No inline comments submitted.

[hello-stephen]

FE Regression Coverage Report

Increment line coverage 13.79% (4/29) 🎉
Increment coverage report
Complete coverage report