Integrate a static filesystem for node modules with kibana

[mistic]

That issue aims to solve the problems highlighted on #11783.

We wanna ship the Kibana's node_modules inside a static filesystem so we can decrease the number of files into our distributable, avoid problems like the max path length and the creation of a service (on windows) as well as decrease the amount of time needed for decompressing.

Related to #27466
Related to #34016
Blocks #6218

== Benchmark ==

I've collect some benchmarks when using a static-fs with Kibana.
The hardware used was:

Computer: Custom Windows Box
OS: Windows 10 64bits
Processor: 3,7 GHz AMD Ryzen 2700x
Memory: 16 GB 2933 MHz DDR4
Disk: SSD 500GB NVMe

Stats (on distributable)	Without Static-Fs	With Static-Fs	Difference
Unzip (windows default tool)	47m	8m	-83%
Number of files	137476	22803	-83%
Used memory	298MB	335MB	+12%
Load time (cold start)	~3s	3.253	+8%

[elasticmachine]

Pinging @elastic/kibana-operations

[mistic]

I've updated the issue with some recent benchmarks I collected after the integration

[zfy0701]

is there an evaluation for runtime performance?

E.g. I'm iterating through files in a non node_module folder, will it get slower?

[mistic]

@zfy0701 I currently don't have written down data for it, but on my manual tests I didn't found any evidence of a bad performance impact. Other good evidence is that on the PR with the integration with kibana, the global ci running time was even lower than the last days average (I guess it was happening due to an improvement I did when reading streams from the static-fs)