Write last time node of each cycle rather than EOC to database

[onufer]

Description

This PR Removes the interactEOC database write and forces the write at the last time step instead. The figure below shows the before and after. State points at red lines are written to database. State points with a circle around them are all at the same exact time in the reactor life (within the armi model). The bottom half is the new direction that this PR follows.

Note: After this PR, most databases will have 1 more time node, such that there is at least one accessible node for every time in the Reactor.

Close #1100

---

Checklist

• This PR has only one purpose or idea.
• Tests have been added/updated to verify that the new/changed code works.

• The code style follows good practices.
• The commit message(s) follow good practices.

• The release notes (location doc/release/0.X.rst) are up-to-date with any bug fixes or new features.
• The documentation is still up-to-date in the doc folder.
• The dependencies are still up-to-date in setup.py.

[albeanth]

@onufer what does this PR do? I can infer what the changes are to loadOperator in armi/bookkeeping/db/__init__.py, but it's not clear what's going on with the changes in bookkeeping/db/databaseInterface.py.

EDIT:
Thank you for the PR description!

[onufer]

closed in favor of #1100

[john-science]

I can't wait!

We will want unit tests on this new feature at some point. Should be straight forward.

[john-science]

Can we add a release note under "API Changes"?

armi/doc/release/0.3.rst

Lines 20 to 22 in b3986c1

	API Changes
	-----------
	#. Replacing the concrete material with a better reference. (`PR#1717 <https://github.com/terrapower/armi/pull/1717>`_)

I would like it to say that we added a new time node, and slightly modified the meaning of one that existed. (Even if the change is small, this is the place where we tell people it happened.)

[john-science]

@onufer Can you re-run ruff? It looks like the linting CI is broken.

[john-science]

When this PR is ready for final review, you can take it out of "Draft".

[keckler]

Thanks Mark. This change was less painful to make than I expected.

[keckler]

Sorry, last question -- Is there really not any documentation that needs to be updated with this change?

[john-science]

Sorry, last question -- Is there really not any documentation that needs to be updated with this change?

Well, as I noted somewhere (here or in the ticket?) there is no place in the docs where we explain the time steps in the DB. I imagine that should go some where in doc/user/input.rst, but I'm not immediately sure where.

It's certainly a strange omission, but I think that needs to be fixed outside this PR. It does need to be fixed though.