release-22.1: sql: fix reporting of stored and key columns in pg_attribute

[e-mbrown]

Backport 1/1 commits from #90287.

/cc @cockroachdb/release

---

Resolves #88106
Resolves #88107

The primary key was stored in pg_attribute using its table attribute number and stored columns weren't included in pg_attribute. This commit changes the behavior to match Postgres.

Release note (bug fix): Fixed the calculation of the
pg_attribute.attnum column for indexes so that the attnum is always
based on the order the column appears in the index. Also fixed the
pg_attribute table so that it includes stored columns in secondary indexes.

---

Release justification: low risk bug fix

[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?

[cockroach-teamcity]

This change is 

[rafiss]

lgtm!

Reviewable status: complete! 0 of 0 LGTMs obtained