Fix: Return fast before traverse for wrong ids

[oguzhankoral]

Fixes Object blabla not found in SQLite cache error. Some projects are poisoned with bad serialization before and we prevent it with this fix. Actually we do not care closures except root object, if an id is not in root object closures, it smells very badly.

[didimitrie]

Tested this locally, approved from my end.

Another part that is important and not documented: the root object's closure's will always contain all children ids - as such, this is also part an optimisation to not check for any subsequent child's closures (I might've gotten this part wrong, cc @oguzhankoral )

[oguzhankoral]

Tested this locally, approved from my end.

Another part that is important and not documented: the root object's closure's will always contain all children ids - as such, this is also part an optimisation to not check for any subsequent child's closures (I might've gotten this part wrong, cc @oguzhankoral )

This PR is conceptual fix, I will let @adamhathcock to refactor if he wishes. What I realized on debug, we were trying to traverse every ids in the closure of every object, which we didn't have to, root objects' closures are enough to get what we need. I felt a bit we do a lot of unnecessary work

[adamhathcock]

Needs to atleast be a hashset, ideally frozen as it's used a lot, but probably not copied at all. I'll fix it soon

[JR-Morgan]

@adamhathcock and I are confident that we have solved this problem already on send.

Old speckle commits may still fail, but I feel strongly that we add bloat to our deserialize process inorder to support a bugs in a previous beta that are already fixed.

Unless we can reproduce this problem on new commits, I'm tempted to say we shouldn't accept this.

[JR-Morgan]

Disregard previous, after a quick chat with Oguzhan, existing projects that have datachunks with closures are still a problem for subsequent sends.

Lets follow Adam's suggestion to use a Frozen set, otherwise this is a good change.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 60.00000% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 70.64%. Comparing base (c9a5103) to head (03f18ad).
Report is 1 commits behind head on dev.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...Sdk/Serialisation/V2/Receive/DeserializeProcess.cs	60.00%	1 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##              dev     #221       +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage   59.40%   70.64%   +11.23%     
===========================================
  Files         262      278       +16     
  Lines       10408    11128      +720     
  Branches     1102     1104        +2     
===========================================
+ Hits         6183     7861     +1678     
+ Misses       3965     2912     -1053     
- Partials      260      355       +95     

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