Take advantage of bloom filter when delete terms

### Description

Today we delete terms in a [seeking forward fashion with `seekCeil`](https://github.com/apache/lucene/blob/09da2291c501e25c38a2cb69899b69afb65a22e5/lucene/core/src/java/org/apache/lucene/index/FrozenBufferedUpdates.java#L602). This can help short cut terms seek by comparing to the next existed term. But the `seekCeil` can not take advantage of [`bloom filter`](https://github.com/apache/lucene/blob/09da2291c501e25c38a2cb69899b69afb65a22e5/lucene/codecs/src/java/org/apache/lucene/codecs/bloom/BloomFilteringPostingsFormat.java#L331) which also significantly helped primary key lookups. I wonder if it is a acceptable trade off to use `seekExact` here for potential bloom filter implementation, or we can have a way to take advantage of both short-cuts (E.g. add `mightContains` for `TermsEnum`) ?

(I'd think this is not only the problem for delete terms but all scenes that need to seek sorted terms)

Start with FrozenBufferedUpdates.java around the seekCeil-based delete-term logic and BloomFilteringPostingsFormat.java around the bloom-filter lookup described in the issue. Compare seekExact, seekCeil, and the proposed TermsEnum mightContains approach, then determine the needed design and validation for preserving both shortcuts; done requires an agreed implementation direction and corresponding behavior checks.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.