add receipt generation to cryptosim

[jewei1997]

Describe your changes and provide context

• Add receipt generation to cryptosim: each simulated ERC20 transfer transaction now produces a realistic receipt with logs, bloom filter, gas fields, and tx type distribution
• Add a RecieptStoreSimulator that consumes generated receipts and writes them to a parquet store with WAL, flush, rotation, and pruning — matching the real node's write path
• Add configurable parquet store settings: ReceiptKeepRecent, ReceiptPruneIntervalSeconds, ReceiptMaxBlocksPerFile, ReceiptBlockFlushInterval
• Add receipt write metrics: receipt_block_write_duration_seconds (histogram), receipt_channel_depth (gauge), receipts_written_total (counter), receipt_errors_total (counter)
• Move block building to a background goroutine (blockBuilder) so transaction generation doesn't block the main execution loop

Set "GenerateReceipts": true to enable. See config/reciept-store.json for an example config. All receipt store tuning parameters have production-matching defaults and can be left unset.

Testing performed to validate your change

unit tests + running cryptosim simulation

[github-actions]

The latest Buf updates on your PR. Results from workflow Buf / buf (pull_request).

Build	Format	Lint	Breaking	Updated (UTC)
✅ passed	✅ passed	✅ passed	✅ passed	Mar 18, 2026, 6:29 PM

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 58.58%. Comparing base (8a11ce5) to head (00f5e88).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3047      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   58.61%   58.58%   -0.03%     
==========================================
  Files        2090     2090              
  Lines      172771   172771              
==========================================
- Hits       101262   101211      -51     
- Misses      62532    62567      +35     
- Partials     8977     8993      +16     

Flag	Coverage Δ
sei-chain-pr	75.27% <100.00%> (?)
sei-db	70.41% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
sei-db/ledger_db/receipt/parquet_store.go	67.42% <100.00%> (ø)

... and 17 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[cody-littley]

LGTM, pending review of dashboard changes.

[cody-littley]

We'll want to eventually replace this block with the one defined in https://github.com/sei-protocol/sei-chain/blob/fe31475c4e295d695ee7f09fcbfefea9f39e7032/sei-db/common/metrics/buckets.go

The buckets.go linked above isn't merged yet, so no need to block this PR. Just mentioning this so we don't forget to do it later.

[cody-littley]

Would it be possible to change the parameter to latency time.Duration, then convert it to seconds internally in this method? In general, I think it's cleaner to pass around time quantities as durations when possible, since it reduces the chances of accidentally messing up the units. There are a few rare exceptions to this rule, e.g. we probably want to use non-duration values in config files. But when we are measuring latencies, the duration type is good to use.

[jewei1997]

fixed