Add verification tests

[troyraen]

Change Description

• My PR includes a link to the issue that I am addressing

Closes #118, closes #373, closes #374

Adds the following:

• Verifier class
  • Includes these tests: hats.io.validation.is_valid_catalog, schemas, file sets, row counts
  • Outputs this file: verifier_results.csv
• Unit tests
• Test data
  • Two malformed datasets: 'bad_schemas' and 'wrong_files_and_rows'
  • Code to regenerate those datasets in case that is needed in the future.

Stil to-do:

• Test a large catalog and determine whether tests may benefit from parallelization with dask.

Code Quality

• I have read the Contribution Guide and LINCC Frameworks Code of Conduct
• My code follows the code style of this project
• My code builds (or compiles) cleanly without any errors or warnings
• My code contains relevant comments and necessary documentation

New Feature Checklist

• I have added or updated the docstrings associated with my feature using the NumPy docstring format
• I have updated the tutorial to highlight my new feature (if appropriate)
• I have added unit/End-to-End (E2E) test cases to cover my new feature
• My change includes a breaking change
  • My change includes backwards compatibility and deprecation warnings (if possible)

[github-actions]

Before [57aaa9d]	After [0e37cc0]	Ratio	Benchmark (Parameter)
failed	failed	n/a	benchmarks.BinningSuite.time_read_histogram

Click here to view all benchmarks.

[troyraen]

Unit tests are failing because of #427.

I need some guidance on the pre-commit failures. Most seem to be a result of path arguments being accepted as strings which are converted in the post_init, but the conversion isn't being recognized.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 95.11%. Comparing base (c161725) to head (2eff4ed).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #428      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   94.57%   95.11%   +0.54%     
==========================================
  Files          28       28              
  Lines        1622     1802     +180     
==========================================
+ Hits         1534     1714     +180     
  Misses         88       88              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[troyraen]

@delucchi-cmu, this is finally ready for your review.

I tested it on the ZTF DR20 Lightcurves dataset (29176 partitions; 10TB) several times. It requires about 60GB RAM with a bit over half of that coming from hats.io.validation.is_valid_catalog. Total runtime is about 15 minutes, with this breakdown:

• 30 sec : Verifier.from_args (load datasets)
• 11.5 min : test_is_valid_catalog (just calls hats.io.validation.is_valid_catalog)
• 0.1 sec : test_file_sets
• 3 min : test_num_rows
• 2 sec : test_schemas

It does not currently use Dask. If the times above are reasonably representative for other large catalogs (which they may or may not be; idk) then I don't think it needs it. Let me know what you think there.