Better handling of null tableNames

[soumitra-st]

Robust handling of null tableName to resolve below stack trace when the caller invoked this method as:

String tableName = null;
brokerSelector.selectBroker(tableName);

Caused by: java.lang.NullPointerException: Cannot invoke "String.replace(java.lang.CharSequence, java.lang.CharSequence)" because "tableName" is null
 ┊at org.apache.pinot.client.utils.BrokerSelectorUtils.getTableNameWithoutSuffix(BrokerSelectorUtils.java:69)
 ┊at org.apache.pinot.client.utils.BrokerSelectorUtils.getTablesCommonBrokers(BrokerSelectorUtils.java:42)
 ┊at org.apache.pinot.client.DynamicBrokerSelector.selectBroker(DynamicBrokerSelector.java:94)

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 0% with 1 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 61.88%. Comparing base (59551e4) to head (f4e09dd).
Report is 130 commits behind head on master.

Files	Patch %	Lines
...org/apache/pinot/client/DynamicBrokerSelector.java	0.00%	0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master   #12654      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     61.75%   61.88%   +0.13%     
+ Complexity      207      198       -9     
============================================
  Files          2436     2452      +16     
  Lines        133233   133840     +607     
  Branches      20636    20766     +130     
============================================
+ Hits          82274    82824     +550     
+ Misses        44911    44888      -23     
- Partials       6048     6128      +80     

Flag	Coverage Δ
custom-integration1	<0.01% <0.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
integration	<0.01% <0.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
integration1	<0.01% <0.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
integration2	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
java-11	61.82% <0.00%> (+0.11%)	⬆️
java-21	61.76% <0.00%> (+0.13%)	⬆️
skip-bytebuffers-false	61.86% <0.00%> (+0.11%)	⬆️
skip-bytebuffers-true	61.72% <0.00%> (+33.99%)	⬆️
temurin	61.88% <0.00%> (+0.13%)	⬆️
unittests	61.87% <0.00%> (+0.13%)	⬆️
unittests1	46.91% <ø> (+0.02%)	⬆️
unittests2	27.77% <0.00%> (+0.03%)	⬆️

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.