Refactor reuse some simple db.SearchOrderBy

[CaiCandong]

As @yp05327 suggested in #25808 , we should use db.SearchOrderBy instead of sortType whenever possible. Considering that db.SearchOrderBy can't cover all the complex sorting logic possible, I've made a simple modification to the implementation in improve in #25806.
related #25806
close #25808

[wxiaoguang]

I do not think it right to add more "db.SearchOrderXxx", it's an over-design/over-abstraction.

In the end, every model/table should have their own "order rules", but not using the shared unclear one.

[wxiaoguang]

The over-designed/over-abstracted shared constants / shared templates already causes problems like #14947

[CaiCandong]

I do not think it right to add more "db.SearchOrderXxx", it's an over-design/over-abstraction.

In the end, every model/table should have its own "order rules", but not use the shared unclear one.

I also think that having the same "order rules" common to every model/table is a bit of over-design, so I somehow backed out the improve in #25806 in my implementation.

While keeping each model/table independent, reusing some simple sorting rules can also reduce the possibility of errors. I think there is a trade-off between reuse and independence.

Maybe I should change the title of this PR.

[yp05327]

Maybe we can design a global shareable order rules, like the usage of db.SearchOrderByXXX now.
And for each model/table they have their own "order rules", and some of these rules can reference the globally shared order rules.
Then we can avoid over-design and some simple mistakes like #25806.

ps: We have this simple logic mistake for over 3 years, but no one notice it.