ui: standardize the display of node names in node lists

[petermattis]

Standardize the display of node names in node lists. The nodes overview
list was displaying nodes as N<id> <ip-address> while graphs display
<ip-address> (n<id>). Standardize on the latter format. A similar
problem existed on the statement details page which was displaying
N<id> <ip-address> (n<id>). The node id was being displayed twice!

Release note: None

[cockroach-teamcity]

This change is 

[petermattis]

Reviewable status: complete! 0 of 0 LGTMs obtained

---

pkg/ui/src/views/cluster/containers/nodesOverview/index.tsx, line 131 at r1 (raw file):

  return (
    <Link className="nodes-table__link" to={`/node/${record.nodeId}`}>
      <Text>{record.nodeName}</Text>

Why does nodeName not include the (n<id>) suffix? Should we be using getDisplayName to populate nodeName?

[dhartunian]

Thanks for this @petermattis! I think I'll merge as-is for now. I agree something like getDisplayName should be explored to standardize the naming but it doesn't look like the types quite line up so I opened a ticket to explore later #45622

@Annebirzin see Peter's comment above for the changes he made to the node naming. Let me know if there's a strong reason to use the Nx prefix notation for nodes. Otherwise I think consistency is preferred for now.

cc @taroface hopefully if this is intersecting with any docs work it's making your life easier :)

[dhartunian]

bors r+

[craig]

Build succeeded

• GitHub CI (Cockroach)

[Annebirzin]

@dhartunian 👍 makes sense, we can standardize to <ip-address> (n<id>)

[petermattis]

Let me know if there's a strong reason to use the Nx prefix notation for nodes.

I have a strong preference for n<id> notation because we use that notation throughout our debug logs. Sounds like @Annebirzin is on board with that, just wanted to make the reasoning for my preference clear.