Support archival queries by modifying the WorkingSet

[dubbelosix]

Description

This accomplishes support for archival / versioned queries against state-db and native-db. This is similar to #1170 but instead of modifying the Storage level, this modification is at the WorkingSet level

Linked Issues

• Archival state support for state_db and native_db #1170

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #1184 (171b302) into nightly (c6a012f) will increase coverage by 0.0%.
The diff coverage is 90.2%.

Additional details and impacted files

Files	Coverage Δ
full-node/db/sov-db/src/schema/tables.rs	89.0% <100.0%> (+2.6%)	⬆️
...ystem/module-implementations/sov-bank/src/token.rs	81.7% <ø> (-0.2%)	⬇️
...odule-system/sov-modules-api/src/containers/map.rs	96.5% <ø> (ø)
...odule-system/sov-modules-api/src/containers/mod.rs	100.0% <100.0%> (ø)
module-system/sov-modules-api/src/lib.rs	97.6% <ø> (ø)
module-system/sov-state/src/prover_storage.rs	94.3% <100.0%> (+0.3%)	⬆️
full-node/db/sov-db/src/native_db.rs	98.6% <96.2%> (-1.4%)	⬇️
...odule-system/sov-modules-core/src/storage/cache.rs	90.0% <90.9%> (+<0.1%)	⬆️
module-system/sov-modules-core/src/storage/mod.rs	89.2% <92.3%> (-3.5%)	⬇️
module-system/sov-state/src/zk_storage.rs	55.2% <0.0%> (-3.9%)	⬇️
... and 1 more

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes

[neysofu]

The PR looks good – I'd just like to make sure that we're not accumulating too much tech debt with this change, since it doesn't replace all instances of WorkingSet with generics so it leaves things in a somewhat messy state. With the addition of ArchivalWorkingSet, we also have too many WorkingSet-like structs – although that's definitely not this PR's fault. Let's brainstorm at standup!

[citizen-stig]

Look good to me. I don't see any blockers to integrating fork management into it.

Changes in sov-db are not entierly new, native db just gets same functionality as state_db already has.

[bkolad]

LGTM, would it be possible to add more tests in sov-modules-code/tests ? (In a separate PR)