**Describe what's wrong**

Wrong table name in logs after table `RENAME`


**Does it reproduce on recent release?**

Yes.
**How to reproduce**
22.6

```
CREATE TABLE table_test_a
(
    `key` UInt32
)
ENGINE = MergeTree
ORDER BY key;

INSERT INTO table_test_a SELECT *
FROM numbers(1000);

RENAME TABLE table_test_a TO table_test_b;

SELECT *
FROM table_test_b
FORMAT `Null`;


[LAPTOP-] 2022.06.13 10:58:18.370192 [ 27745 ] {43b0dc5d-69e6-4e42-b96c-a13871b6a791} <Debug> executeQuery: (from 127.0.0.1:58484) SELECT * FROM table_test_b FORMAT Null; (stage: Complete)
[LAPTOP-] 2022.06.13 10:58:18.370599 [ 27745 ] {43b0dc5d-69e6-4e42-b96c-a13871b6a791} <Trace> ContextAccess (default): Access granted: SELECT(key) ON test.table_test_b
[LAPTOP-] 2022.06.13 10:58:18.370665 [ 27745 ] {43b0dc5d-69e6-4e42-b96c-a13871b6a791} <Trace> ContextAccess (default): Access granted: SELECT(key) ON test.table_test_b
[LAPTOP-] 2022.06.13 10:58:18.370714 [ 27745 ] {43b0dc5d-69e6-4e42-b96c-a13871b6a791} <Trace> InterpreterSelectQuery: FetchColumns -> Complete
[LAPTOP-] 2022.06.13 10:58:18.370783 [ 27745 ] {43b0dc5d-69e6-4e42-b96c-a13871b6a791} <Debug> test.table_test_a (SelectExecutor): Key condition: unknown
[LAPTOP-] 2022.06.13 10:58:18.370817 [ 27745 ] {43b0dc5d-69e6-4e42-b96c-a13871b6a791} <Debug> test.table_test_a (SelectExecutor): Selected 1/1 parts by partition key, 1 parts by primary key, 1/1 marks by primary key, 1 marks to read from 1 ranges
[LAPTOP-] 2022.06.13 10:58:18.370847 [ 27745 ] {43b0dc5d-69e6-4e42-b96c-a13871b6a791} <Trace> MergeTreeInOrderSelectProcessor: Reading 1 ranges in order from part all_1_1_0, approx. 1000 rows starting from 0
[LAPTOP-] 2022.06.13 10:58:18.371812 [ 27745 ] {43b0dc5d-69e6-4e42-b96c-a13871b6a791} <Information> executeQuery: Read 1000 rows, 3.91 KiB in 0.0015354 sec., 651296 rows/sec., 2.48 MiB/sec.
[LAPTOP-] 2022.06.13 10:58:18.371956 [ 27745 ] {43b0dc5d-69e6-4e42-b96c-a13871b6a791} <Debug> MemoryTracker: Peak memory usage (for query): 45.10 KiB.
```
**Expected behavior**

Correct table name in logs


**Additional context**

Interesting, does it affect grants and etc (looks like no, in ContextAccess log it's using correct table name )

bool is_covered_by_min_max_block = part->info.min_block <= drop_range.min_block && part->info.max_block >= drop_range.max_block && part->info.getMutationVersion() >= drop_range.getMutationVersion();
            if (is_covered_by_min_max_block)
            {
                LOG_INFO(log, "Skipping drop range for part {} because covering part {} already exists", drop_range.getPartName(), part->name);
                return {};
            }
        }
        if (part->info.min_block < drop_range.min_block)
        {
            if (drop_range.min_block <= part->info.max_block)
            {
                
                throw Exception(ErrorCodes::LOGICAL_ERROR, "Unexpected merged part {} intersecting drop range {}",
                                part->name, drop_range.getPartName());
            }
            continue;
        }
        
        if (part->info.min_block > drop_range.max_block)
            break;
        if (part->info.min_block <= drop_range.max_block && drop_range.max_block < part->info.max_block)
        {
            
            throw Exception(ErrorCodes::LOGICAL_ERROR, "Unexpected merged part {} intersecting drop range {}",