Add gRPC query to get all contract specs and record specs for a scope spec

[minxylynx]

Summary

There a several gRPC queries used by Explorer to fetch spec data. However, there is not a one and done query to get all contract and record specs under a scope spec, as there is for sessions and records under a scope. This would add a query that gives all requested information under a scope spec.

Proposal

• TBD @iramiller

---

For Admin Use

• Not duplicate issue
• Appropriate labels applied
• Appropriate contributors tagged
• Contributor assigned/self-assigned

[SpicyLemon]

I just got some counts of specs on mainnet.

Scope Specs: 22
Contract Specs: 7609
Record Specs: 24983

Ave record specs per contract spec = 24983/7609 = 3.28334866605336
Ave contract specs per scope spec = 7609/22 = 345.863636363636
Ave record specs per contract spec = 24983/22 = 1135.59090909091

So the average result would have 1 scope spec + 3 contract specs + 1136 record specs = 1140 things in the result.

That's a pretty big result.

Furthermore, since there's only 22 scopes, I grabbed them all to get contract spec counts for each. Here's the distribution:

scope specs	number of contract specs
15	1
1	5
1	9
1	30
1	112
1	129
1	747
1	2401

That scope spec with 2401 contract specs probably has 2401 * 3.28334866605336 = 7883.32014719412 records. That's 1 scope + 2401 contract specs + 7883 record specs = 10285 things in the result. That's more than likely a problem.

Pagination doesn't make sense for this query since we're returning three different types of things. I guess only two might need pagination, but that's still complicated.

Testnet has more of each spec type, but the averages and that max are pretty similar.

I guess this is something to consider, and keep an eye on, but it's possible the query just doesn't work for some scope specs (or takes multiple tries).

[SpicyLemon]

Also, rather than adding a new query for this, it's probably best to just enhance the ScopeSpecification query to behave similar to the Scope query.

[SpicyLemon]

Also consider enhancing the ContractSpecification query to be able to also include the records specs for it. A contract spec can be used by multiple scope specs. If we have an index for getting scope specs by contract spec id, it might be worth possibly including the scope specs there too. If we don't have such an index, definitely don't include scope specs here.

The only enhancement I would consider for the RecordSpecification query is possibly including its ContractSpecification too.