Removes SYNC-3364 [v110] history configuration cleanup

[tarikeshaq]

Disclaimer

⚠️ This is a very large PR and I'm planning to break it down into smaller ones, but wanted to share out the cleanups I'm working on. If you're curious look at the code, but mostly reviewing the PR description is what I'm looking for. ⚠️

Overview

With history using Application services places (expected to rollout remotely in 108) we can start cleaning up a lot of legacy code! This PR is incomplete needs a TON of testing and is a work in progress. With that preface, here's what's included:

Removal of configuration

• We added configuration in 108, so we can remotely configure the Places APIs. This PR removes that configuration (assuming places ships OK in 108, we will not land this until the rollout is complete and considered OK)
• This PR removes that configuration completely and enables the places API by default

Removal of old APIs

• With the configuration gone, we can now safely remove the old SqlHistory APIs related to history storage and sync, this PR does that

Refactoring of SQLiteHistory

• The SQLiteHistory was used to manage:
  • History
  • TopSites
  • Pinned Sites
  • Favicons
  • History Sync
• After switching to the new history, we can simplify it so that it only manages the features that are not yet available in places:
  • Pinned Sites
  • Favicons
• This PR includes a ton of refactoring to allow that to happen
• NOTE: because the refactor touches many surfaces (including top sites) we should definitely run a round of QA before any of it lands. I'm happy to schedule meetings to walk through the changes too

Renaming SQLiteHistory to BrowserDBSQLite

• After this PR SQLiteHistory won't manage history. So renamed it to BrowserDBSQLite so it's a bit more generic.

Removing Caching for top sites

• We have a caching layer in SQLiteHistory for top sites, we remove that and call directly into places instead the same way android does

Deletion of dead code and redundant tests

• There is quite a bit of dead code, and tests. This PR has the removal of that too which accounts to about half the changes here

Refactors not in this PR

There are a few changes that I intentionally left out of here, because I believe they have a bigger scope or should be done even more carefully. THIS IS AN INCOMPLETE LIST AND I WILL KEEP ADDING TO IT

1. Complete removal of user's data in their history tables, from there, there will be no going back
2. Complete removal of the table creation for all the tables we no longer use, it should be safe to remove though.

[mergify]

This pull request has conflicts when rebasing. Could you fix it @tarikeshaq?

[tarikeshaq]

Got around to removing the dead tests and refactoring any history tests to test places properly - next step will be to split this apart a little and make sure there is enough context on what's going on here

[mergify]

This pull request has conflicts when rebasing. Could you fix it @tarikeshaq?

[tarikeshaq]

A short self-review as I clean things up more

If anyone is following along, I want to repeat that I have no intention of landing all of this at once

The idea is to breakdown which of those cleanups are ones we want and land those one by one

[lmarceau]

Swiftlint warnings not related to this PR, will be fixed with changes here

[mergify]

This pull request has conflicts when rebasing. Could you fix it @tarikeshaq?

[nbhasin2]

@tarikeshaq have you already done a walkthrough of this PR?
This is too big imo to be reviewed here on github

[tarikeshaq]

@nbhasin2 I did a walk-through with @OrlaM and @lmarceau, some notes as well in https://docs.google.com/document/d/1R7Fko3aPc9bNHc3FazSdHJlcPk1LZeX8lbvkzTvDUxA/edit and https://docs.google.com/document/d/11smb_1bXMkHDHA-ZwdsWIoHFeGXgDajO2S4nYmcyrPQ/edit

[nbhasin2]

Perfect @tarikeshaq, I will skim through this although you are in good hands of @OrlaM and @lmarceau for the review 🙂
lmk if I can help in any way!!

[mergify]

This pull request has conflicts when rebasing. Could you fix it @tarikeshaq?

[OrlaM]

One small comment, otherwise looks good.
At some point next week we should create a build off this branch to send to QA for testing.

[lmarceau]

The special build was done testing with task #12674, I think this is ready to be merged (but we'll need the experiment result before that @tarikeshaq ?)

[tarikeshaq]

Thanks @lmarceau!! Experiment results are in, and I think we should land this. I cover the results in https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fC55c9m66E18ztQwEFhfmesJdSWfes3eSQLcfaq4Kjo/edit

TLDR:

• 5-6% migrations aren't ending, meaning that we are migrating too much data, in the doc I cover why, we have many users with a lot of history.
• I'll have a PR before the end of 110 to upgrade to a new version of application-services that limits the migration based on the above findings
• I'll also have another PR before end of 110 for Follow up for application-services history: Run maintenance on interval to prune database #12680
• Both PRs will be up and ready before the soft freeze, in the week after we're back from the holidays
• I have a hope that once we use the new history we'll also see some improvement in reported performance issues, but I'm crossing my fingers on this one.

[mergify]

This pull request has conflicts when rebasing. Could you fix it @tarikeshaq?

[OrlaM]

Build is green on BR