Normalize the job queue latency's value

[stonezdj]

fix #21354

Thank you for contributing to Harbor!

Comprehensive Summary of your change

Issue being fixed

Fixes #(issue)

Please indicate you've done the following:

• Well Written Title and Summary of the PR
• Label the PR as needed. "release-note/ignore-for-release, release-note/new-feature, release-note/update, release-note/enhancement, release-note/community, release-note/breaking-change, release-note/docs, release-note/infra, release-note/deprecation"
• Accepted the DCO. Commits without the DCO will delay acceptance.
• Made sure tests are passing and test coverage is added if needed.
• Considered the docs impact and opened a new docs issue or PR with docs changes if needed in website repository.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 46.27%. Comparing base (c8c11b4) to head (77756a4).
Report is 341 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #21355      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   45.36%   46.27%   +0.91%     
==========================================
  Files         244      247       +3     
  Lines       13333    13883     +550     
  Branches     2719     2875     +156     
==========================================
+ Hits         6049     6425     +376     
- Misses       6983     7121     +138     
- Partials      301      337      +36     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	46.27% <ø> (+0.91%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

see 491 files with indirect coverage changes

[chlins]

lgtm

[bupd]

LGTM!

[wy65701436]

We should pause this PR for further discussion.

Personally, I don't think changing the negative number to 0 is the right approach. The latency should always be positive, and a negative value typically indicates a misconfiguration, such as when the system time on the worker node running harbor-core and harbor-jobservice are not synchronized with the same time server.

Adjusting the value to 0 might mask the underlying issue for the administrator. I prefer that we add a debug log to help identify the potential cause of this situation.