[MINOR][TEST][SQL] Make in-limit.sql more robust

### What changes were proposed in this pull request?

For queries like `t1d in (SELECT t2d FROM  t2 ORDER  BY t2c LIMIT 2)`, the result can be non-deterministic as the result of the subquery may output different results (it's not sorted by `t2d` and it has shuffle).

This PR makes the test more robust by sorting the output column.

### Why are the changes needed?

avoid flaky test

### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?

no

### How was this patch tested?

N/A

Closes #28976 from cloud-fan/small.

Authored-by: Wenchen Fan <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: HyukjinKwon <[email protected]>

Author: cloud-fan

sql/core/src/test/resources/sql-tests/inputs/subquery/in-subquery/in-limit.sql

@@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ SELECT Count(DISTINCT( t1a )),
 FROM   t1
 WHERE  t1d IN (SELECT t2d
                FROM   t2
-               ORDER  BY t2c
+               ORDER  BY t2c, t2d
                LIMIT 2)
 GROUP  BY t1b
 ORDER  BY t1b DESC NULLS FIRST
@@ -93,7 +93,7 @@ SELECT Count(DISTINCT( t1a )),
 FROM   t1
 WHERE  t1d NOT IN (SELECT t2d
                    FROM   t2
-                   ORDER  BY t2b DESC nulls first
+                   ORDER  BY t2b DESC nulls first, t2d
                    LIMIT 1)
 GROUP  BY t1b
 ORDER BY t1b NULLS last

sql/core/src/test/resources/sql-tests/results/subquery/in-subquery/in-limit.sql.out

@@ -103,7 +103,7 @@ SELECT Count(DISTINCT( t1a )),
 FROM   t1
 WHERE  t1d IN (SELECT t2d
                FROM   t2
-               ORDER  BY t2c
+               ORDER  BY t2c, t2d
                LIMIT 2)
 GROUP  BY t1b
 ORDER  BY t1b DESC NULLS FIRST
@@ -136,7 +136,7 @@ SELECT Count(DISTINCT( t1a )),
 FROM   t1
 WHERE  t1d NOT IN (SELECT t2d
                    FROM   t2
-                   ORDER  BY t2b DESC nulls first
+                   ORDER  BY t2b DESC nulls first, t2d
                    LIMIT 1)
 GROUP  BY t1b
 ORDER BY t1b NULLS last