Serialized storage cache

[shargon]

Description

Close #3145
Alternative to #3146

Type of change

• Optimization (the change is only an optimization)
• Style (the change is only a code style for better maintenance or standard purpose)
• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
• This change requires a documentation update

How Has This Been Tested?

• Pending

Test Configuration:

Checklist:

• My code follows the style guidelines of this project
• I have performed a self-review of my code
• I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
• I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
• My changes generate no new warnings
• I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
• New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
• Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream modules

[AnnaShaleva]

Good, it should work this way. But I'd suggest to process existing chains with this change in order to ensure that cache persisting logic works as expected.

[nan01ab]

Adding this to the IReadOnlyStore makes the interface more complex, and each implementation needs to be modified.

Another way:
Add a wrapper class for IStore

class SerializedCacheStore {
     private readonly IStore _store,
     public SerializedCache SerializedCache { get; } = new();

    public(IStore store) { _store = store}
}

[shargon]

And change all the code where we define it?

[cschuchardt88]

@shargon
why not?

[shargon]

I think is easier and simpler like this, Why we need two different types, one with cache and other without?

[cschuchardt88]

If you create an additional class called SerializedCache, doesn't require IReadOnlyStore. Also its misleading and creates more problems than it solves. For example: var cache = Store.SerializedCache.SerializedCache.SerializedCache.SerializedCache.SerializedCache.SerializedCache is that intended?

[shargon]

SerializedCache is not IReadOnlyStore so you can't do Store.SerializedCache.SerializedCache.SerializedCache.SerializedCache.SerializedCache.SerializedCache

[cschuchardt88]

Than it needs to inherit from that interface. All other cache classes do. Now your limiting the class.

[shargon]

I don't understand you, you can't do it Store.SerializedCache.SerializedCache.SerializedCache.SerializedCache.SerializedCache.SerializedCache

[nan01ab]

I think is easier and simpler like this, Why we need two different types, one with cache and other without?

Multi-layer structure.
One layer one feature.

[shargon]

Don't needed to cast something that always will be this type, waste of time, when we want to use it we will need to cast the type, and always we will create this type, otherwise we can't use it, for other things is ok, for this use case, seems worthless to me