refactor(starknet_integration_tests): refactor create_state_sync_config to create multi configs

[nadin-Starkware]

Stack:

• feat(starknet_integration_tests): support running a node with a delay in the integration test #3271
• feat(starknet_integration_tests): enable state sync in integration test #3261
• refactor(starknet_integration_tests): refactor create_state_sync_config to create multi configs #3259 ⬅

⚠️ Part of a stack created by spr. Do not merge manually using the UI - doing so may have unexpected results.

[reviewable-StarkWare]

This change is 

[Itay-Tsabary-Starkware]

Reviewable status: 0 of 1 files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @nadin-Starkware)

---

crates/starknet_integration_tests/src/utils.rs line 95 at r1 (raw file):

    let state_sync_config =
        create_state_sync_configs(state_sync_storage_config, available_ports.get_next_ports(1))
            .remove(0);

Why?

Code quote:

        create_state_sync_configs(state_sync_storage_config, available_ports.get_next_ports(1))
            .remove(0);

[Itay-Tsabary-Starkware]

Reviewable status: 0 of 1 files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @nadin-Starkware)

---

crates/starknet_integration_tests/src/utils.rs line 95 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, Itay-Tsabary-Starkware wrote…

Why?

Specifically why remove(0)

[Itay-Tsabary-Starkware]

Reviewable status: 0 of 1 files reviewed, 2 unresolved discussions (waiting on @nadin-Starkware)

---

crates/starknet_integration_tests/src/utils.rs line 339 at r1 (raw file):

    let mut state_sync_configs = vec![];
    let network_configs = create_connected_network_configs(ports);
    for network_config in network_configs {

use into_iter syntax to create the state sync configs, and then collect them to obtain the required returned vector

Code quote:

network_configs

[nadin-Starkware]

Reviewable status: 0 of 1 files reviewed, 2 unresolved discussions (waiting on @Itay-Tsabary-Starkware)

---

crates/starknet_integration_tests/src/utils.rs line 95 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, Itay-Tsabary-Starkware wrote…

Specifically why remove(0)

Since create_state_sync_configs returns a Vec<StateSyncConfig>, but SequencerNodeConfig expects only a single StateSyncConfig.

---

crates/starknet_integration_tests/src/utils.rs line 339 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, Itay-Tsabary-Starkware wrote…

use into_iter syntax to create the state sync configs, and then collect them to obtain the required returned vector

Done.

[Itay-Tsabary-Starkware]

Reviewed 1 of 1 files at r2, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @nadin-Starkware)

[nadin-Starkware]

✓ Commit merged in pull request #3261