release-23.1: storage: fatal on corruption encountered in background

[blathers-crl]

Backport 1/1 commits from #102252 on behalf of @jbowens.

/cc @cockroachdb/release

---

Previously, on-disk corruption would only fatal the node if an interator observed it. Corruption encountered by a background job like a compaction would not fatal the node. This can result in busy churning through compactions that repeatedly fail, impacting cluster stability and user query latencies.

Now, on-disk corruption results in immediately exiting the node.

Epic: none
Fixes: #101101
Release note (ops change): When local corruption of data is encountered by a background job, a node will now exit immediately.

---

Release justification: Very low-risk change to resolve an issue that can affect cluster stability.

[blathers-crl]

Thanks for opening a backport.

Please check the backport criteria before merging:

• Patches should only be created for serious issues or test-only changes.
• Patches should not break backwards-compatibility.
• Patches should change as little code as possible.
• Patches should not change on-disk formats or node communication protocols.
• Patches should not add new functionality.
• Patches must not add, edit, or otherwise modify cluster versions; or add version gates.

If some of the basic criteria cannot be satisfied, ensure that the exceptional criteria are satisfied within.

• There is a high priority need for the functionality that cannot wait until the next release and is difficult to address in another way.
• The new functionality is additive-only and only runs for clusters which have specifically “opted in” to it (e.g. by a cluster setting).
• New code is protected by a conditional check that is trivial to verify and ensures that it only runs for opt-in clusters.
• The PM and TL on the team that owns the changed code have signed off that the change obeys the above rules.

Add a brief release justification to the body of your PR to justify this backport.

Some other things to consider:

• What did we do to ensure that a user that doesn’t know & care about this backport, has no idea that it happened?
• Will this work in a cluster of mixed patch versions? Did we test that?
• If a user upgrades a patch version, uses this feature, and then downgrades, what happens?

[blathers-crl]

It looks like your PR touches production code but doesn't add or edit any test code. Did you consider adding tests to your PR?

_{🦉 Hoot! I am a Blathers, a bot for CockroachDB. My owner is dev-inf.}

[cockroach-teamcity]

This change is 

[itsbilal]

LGTM

[jbowens]

TFTR!