Add workflow to run SDGym multi-table benchmark monthly and publish results

[R-Palazzo]

Resolve #516
CU-86b7w17ze

• Run benchmark action (working end-to-end)
• Uploading result action (waiting on results to test all the cases; I may create mock ones to test it)

@amontanez24 From what I've experienced, we can currently run 4-gpu machines at the same location:

RuntimeError: GCP instance creation failed: Quota 'NVIDIA_T4_GPUS' exceeded.  Limit: 4.0 in region us-central1.

The initial plan is to have 6 instances running on January 1st (4 for single-table, 2 for multi-table), so I wanted to discuss the options with you:

• Run only 4 machines (start with single-table on January 1st and multi-table on January 5th, so machines are available again)
• Run 6 machines in a different location, if that's allowed.
• Increase the number of machines, if possible.

Maybe there is a better solution that I'm happy to discuss.

[sdv-team]

Task linked: CU-86b7w17ze SDGym - Add workflow to run SDGym multi-table benchmark monthly and publish results #516

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 87.69231% with 8 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 78.87%. Comparing base (d52e10b) to head (84b562d).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on feature_branch/mutli_table_benchmark.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
sdgym/run_benchmark/upload_benchmark_results.py	83.33%	3 Missing ⚠️
sdgym/run_benchmark/utils.py	88.00%	3 Missing ⚠️
sdgym/benchmark.py	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@                           Coverage Diff                            @@
##           feature_branch/mutli_table_benchmark     #518      +/-   ##
========================================================================
+ Coverage                                 78.78%   78.87%   +0.08%     
========================================================================
  Files                                        33       33              
  Lines                                      2791     2826      +35     
========================================================================
+ Hits                                       2199     2229      +30     
- Misses                                      592      597       +5     

Flag	Coverage Δ
integration	54.67% <0.00%> (-0.62%)	⬇️
unit	73.38% <87.69%> (+0.08%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ 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.

[pvk-developer]

I know this won't change probably, but could we use the id from sdgym/run_benchmark/upload_benchmark_results.py if it doesn't cause some circular dependencies ? Or maybe define them in a constants.py file. That way we should just change the id in one file and not have to worry about it.

[amontanez24]

if we do this, let's move to constants file

[amontanez24]

LGTM!