feat(pruner): Implement full and bridge node pruning

[renaynay]

This PR introduces full and bridge node pruning via the --experimental-pruning flag. Support is included for nodes that start from scratch with pruning enabled and also for archival (nodes retaining all historical blocks) that enable the --experimental-pruning flag.

Note that this PR does not support the conversion of a pruned node into an archival one explicitly (it would not support re-syncing deleted blocks).

With pruning enabled, full and bridge nodes' block stores can be expected not to exceed ~4TB (as the upper bound).

In follow-up PRs (hardening), the following features can be expected:

• discovery for archival nodes for archival sync
• inverted_index / light node pruning
• include more metrics for errors

TODO:

• clean up some TODOs
• fix one flakey unit test
• change values back to the actual (GC cycle, sampling window, pruning window, etc).
• figure out whether to store error in pruner checkpoint
• fix issue with pruning genesis block via findPruneableHeaders
• metrics for failed prunes
• set a sane default for max pruneable / consider removing MaxPruneablePerGC as now context timeouts are on a per block basis
• dedup findPruneableHeader test utility
• badger dep

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 60.08584% with 93 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 52.89%. Comparing base (1809680) to head (5918f6d).
Report is 6 commits behind head on main.

Files	Patch %	Lines
pruner/metrics.go	9.09%	30 Missing ⚠️
pruner/service.go	73.80%	18 Missing and 4 partials ⚠️
cmd/util.go	0.00%	14 Missing ⚠️
pruner/checkpoint.go	71.87%	5 Missing and 4 partials ⚠️
pruner/finder.go	83.78%	3 Missing and 3 partials ⚠️
header/headertest/testing.go	72.22%	4 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
pruner/params.go	54.54%	5 Missing ⚠️
cmd/node.go	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3150      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   51.92%   52.89%   +0.97%     
==========================================
  Files         178      183       +5     
  Lines       11316     9539    -1777     
==========================================
- Hits         5876     5046     -830     
+ Misses       4942     3980     -962     
- Partials      498      513      +15     

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

[renaynay]

TODO @renaynay:

add some protection in finder.go to prevent

2024-02-28T16:10:59.333+0100	ERROR	pruner/service	pruner/service.go:129	failed to find prune-able blocks	{"error": "header/store: invalid range(26625,26624)"}

(can sometimes happen but is non-critical error, just ugly)

[walldiss]

Most importantly all time calculations needs to take care of local machine zone, by using time.Now().UTC()

[Wondertan]

@renaynay, there is a little conflict fyi

[Wondertan]

The code is clean and well-structured. It wasn't hard to digest. I didn't find anything critical, and my review is primarily little nits I discovered and questions. There is one general comment about godocs for methods that need to be improved. Otherwise,