Implement set reconciliation based sync (syncv2)

[ivan4th]

Motivation

Existing sync is causing a lot of resource usage, including memory consumption and network traffic, and can't replace gossip which can also be unreliable at times.

Description

This implements the new sync protocol as described here.
The algorithm is based on Range-Based Set Reconciliation paper by Aljoscha Meyer and also loosely based on SREP: Out-Of-Band Sync of Transaction Pools for Large-Scale Blockchains paper by Novak Boškov, Sevval Simsek, Ari Trachtenberg, and David Starobinski.

Test Plan

Add systests that verify new sync.
Verify on testnet, then on mainnet.

TODO

• Explain motivation or link existing issue(s)
• Sync implementation based on red-black monoid tree
• P2P wire protocol for sync
• Implement SREP-like multi-peer sync
• Make code more efficient by getting rid of excess monoid abstraction
• Implement syncv2 for ATXs. This may include adding an untrusted LayerID field to ATXs to make sync more efficient
• Implement SQLite-based "pre-balanced" monoid tree for old data to reduce memory consumption
• Harden the protocol by enforcing communication limits
• Consider replacing red-black monoid tree with a BTree so it can also be used for atxsdata
• Implement sync for other object types
• Test changes and document test plan
• Update documentation as needed
• Update changelog as needed

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 74.59252% with 265 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 80.0%. Comparing base (f2770a4) to head (f8a021f).
Report is 22 commits behind head on develop.

❗ Current head f8a021f differs from pull request most recent head ef02024

Please upload reports for the commit ef02024 to get more accurate results.

Files	Patch %	Lines
hashsync/sync_tree.go	81.1%	67 Missing and 21 partials ⚠️
hashsync/rangesync.go	58.3%	62 Missing and 23 partials ⚠️
hashsync/handler.go	70.6%	39 Missing and 24 partials ⚠️
hashsync/wire_types.go	52.2%	21 Missing ⚠️
hashsync/sync_trees_store.go	89.6%	4 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
common/types/hashes.go	60.0%	2 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop   #5769     +/-   ##
=========================================
- Coverage     80.7%   80.0%   -0.8%     
=========================================
  Files          288     292      +4     
  Lines        29894   30769    +875     
=========================================
+ Hits         24149   24620    +471     
- Misses        4158    4434    +276     
- Partials      1587    1715    +128     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[mathcrypto]

Did we agree already on adding the LayerID field to ATXs? @poszu @ivan4th. ATXs should only include what's need to be there

[ivan4th]

@mathcrypto the discussion was not finished yet, but I restarted it #5785 (comment)