Optimize the message of DatabaseServerInfo

[134130]

Fixes #28421.

in: proxy type: refactor

Changes proposed in this pull request:

• The "Database name" is ambiguous; It can be DBMS's product name or It's inner schema's name.
• In normally, we don't call MySQL as "DBMS product name" or "DBMS name". Just "DBMS" is MySQL.
• Just DBMS is clear.
• Not changing inner field's naming; Since it is already clear that DatabaseServer's name means DatabaseProduct's name

---

Before committing this PR, I'm sure that I have checked the following options:

• My code follows the code of conduct of this project.
• I have self-reviewed the commit code.
• I have (or in comment I request) added corresponding labels for the pull request.
• I have passed maven check locally : ./mvnw clean install -B -T1C -Dmaven.javadoc.skip -Dmaven.jacoco.skip -e.
• I have made corresponding changes to the documentation.
• I have added corresponding unit tests for my changes.

[RaigorJiang]

Hi @134130
Thank you for your serious reply.

In ShardingSphere, we use database type to describe the type of database.
Do you think it is okay to change the log to Database type is xx?

Please refer to:

• DatabaseType
• MySQLDatabaseType

[134130]

@RaigorJiang Yeah, I've considered using database type since many fields and arguments are named with it.
But when we saying database type, It means such as type of DBMSs which like RDBMS, NoSQL, Hierarchical DB, Data Warehouse and somethings...
So I thought using DBMS is better for on message case.

But I am open to changing message to Database type ;)

[RaigorJiang]

@RaigorJiang Yeah, I've considered using database type since many fields and arguments are named with it. But when we saying database type, It means such as type of DBMSs which like RDBMS, NoSQL, Hierarchical DB, Data Warehouse and somethings... So I thought using DBMS is better for on message case.

But I am open to changing message to Database type ;)

In ShardingSphere's Design Philosophy, SQL/NoSQL/NewSQL are considered heterogeneous databases, so can they be collectively called databases?

[134130]

Since ShardingSphere uses Database Product name as Database type in many codes, I also agree concentrate
to Database type.

In ShardingSphere's Design Philosophy, SQL/NoSQL/NewSQL are considered heterogeneous databases, so can they be collectively called databases?

Are you saying database only means Relational databases? I think "Heterogeneous databases" contains all of SQL NoSQL and Others which can stores data.
And I suggests Database kind or Database class to dividing SQL and NoSQL later; Haskell uses Kind as a type of type 😃

[134130]

Do this common class really used in only 3 cases(including 2 tests)?? 😂

[RaigorJiang]

Do this common class really used in only 3 cases(including 2 tests)?? 😂

It seems so.
Some ci failed, please merge the master branch to solve the problem, thank you!

[RaigorJiang]

@134130 Merged, thank you!