perf: Improve performance of CheckOverflow

[andygrove]

Which issue does this PR close?

Closes #.

Rationale for this change

Benchmark	Size	Before	After	Improvement
no_overflow_possible	1K	906 ns	60 ns	93.5% faster
no_overflow_possible	10K	7.26 µs	55 ns	99.2% faster
validation_no_overflow	1K	1.44 µs	1.26 µs	12.3% faster
validation_no_overflow	10K	11.79 µs	10.73 µs	9.3% faster
with_overflow_to_null	1K	925 ns	869 ns	6.3% faster
with_overflow_to_null	10K	7.39 µs	7.08 µs	4.5% faster

What changes are included in this PR?

• no_overflow_possible (93-99% faster): When input precision ≤ target precision, we skip all validation and just update metadata - O(1) instead of O(n).
• validation_no_overflow (9-12% faster): Uses the optimized is_valid_decimal_precision() that avoids error string allocation.
• with_overflow_to_null (4-6% faster): Uses Arrow's optimized single-pass null_if_overflow_precision() method.

How are these changes tested?

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 59.14%. Comparing base (f09f8af) to head (cf2b2a4).
⚠️ Report is 803 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main    #3001      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     56.12%   59.14%   +3.01%     
- Complexity      976     1367     +391     
============================================
  Files           119      167      +48     
  Lines         11743    15493    +3750     
  Branches       2251     2569     +318     
============================================
+ Hits           6591     9163    +2572     
- Misses         4012     5038    +1026     
- Partials       1140     1292     +152     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[coderfender]

Test failing :
test integral divide overflow for decimal

  == Results ==
  !== Correct Answer - 6 ==   == Spark Answer - 6 ==
   struct<(a div b):bigint>   struct<(a div b):bigint>
  ![null]                     [-1]
  ![null]                     [-1]
  ![null]                     [-1]
  ![null]                     [-1]
  ![null]                     [-4252079254050434654]
  ![null]                     [8770993997598117786] (QueryTest.scala:244)