[SPARK-10136] [SQL] A more robust fix for SPARK-10136

PR #8341 is a valid fix for SPARK-10136, but it didn't catch the real root cause.  The real problem can be rather tricky to explain, and requires audiences to be pretty familiar with parquet-format spec, especially details of `LIST` backwards-compatibility rules.  Let me have a try to give an explanation here.

The structure of the problematic Parquet schema generated by parquet-avro is something like this:

```
message m {
  <repetition> group f (LIST) {         // Level 1
    repeated group array (LIST) {       // Level 2
      repeated <primitive-type> array;  // Level 3
    }
  }
}
```

(The schema generated by parquet-thrift is structurally similar, just replace the `array` at level 2 with `f_tuple`, and the other one at level 3 with `f_tuple_tuple`.)

This structure consists of two nested legacy 2-level `LIST`-like structures:

1. The repeated group type at level 2 is the element type of the outer array defined at level 1

   This group should map to an `CatalystArrayConverter.ElementConverter` when building converters.

2. The repeated primitive type at level 3 is the element type of the inner array defined at level 2

   This group should also map to an `CatalystArrayConverter.ElementConverter`.

The root cause of SPARK-10136 is that, the group at level 2 isn't properly recognized as the element type of level 1.  Thus, according to parquet-format spec, the repeated primitive at level 3 is left as a so called "unannotated repeated primitive type", and is recognized as a required list of required primitive type, thus a `RepeatedPrimitiveConverter` instead of a `CatalystArrayConverter.ElementConverter` is created for it.

According to  parquet-format spec, unannotated repeated type shouldn't appear in a `LIST`- or `MAP`-annotated group.  PR #8341 fixed this issue by allowing such unannotated repeated type appear in `LIST`-annotated groups, which is a non-standard, hacky, but valid fix.  (I didn't realize this when authoring #8341 though.)

As for the reason why level 2 isn't recognized as a list element type, it's because of the following `LIST` backwards-compatibility rule defined in the parquet-format spec:

> If the repeated field is a group with one field and is named either `array` or uses the `LIST`-annotated group's name with `_tuple` appended then the repeated type is the element type and elements are required.

(The `array` part is for parquet-avro compatibility, while the `_tuple` part is for parquet-thrift.)

This rule is implemented in [`CatalystSchemaConverter.isElementType`] [1], but neglected in [`CatalystRowConverter.isElementType`] [2].  This PR delivers a more robust fix by adding this rule in the latter method.

Note that parquet-avro 1.7.0 also suffers from this issue. Details can be found at [PARQUET-364] [3].

[1]: https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/85f9a61357994da5023b08b0a8a2eb09388ce7f8/sql/core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/execution/datasources/parquet/CatalystSchemaConverter.scala#L259-L305
[2]: https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/85f9a61357994da5023b08b0a8a2eb09388ce7f8/sql/core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/execution/datasources/parquet/CatalystRowConverter.scala#L456-L463
[3]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PARQUET-364

Author: Cheng Lian <lian@databricks.com>

Closes #8361 from liancheng/spark-10136/proper-version.