[Blazor] Adds support for persisting and restoring disconnected circuits from storage

[javiercn]

Details to be added. There are some missing things on this PR that will be done in separate PRs:

• Gracefully persisting a circuit, including sending the state to the client.
• Persisting a circuit to distributed storage, which will use HybridCache as a base implementation.

The detailed design can be found #60494

The main changes from the original design as well as some additional details are:

• We rely on HybridCache for handling storage to distributed storage mechanisms.
  • This means we don't have to create individual packages for different distributed backends (redis, blob).
• We provide a default implementation that leverages MemoryCache (same as disconnected circuits in CircuitRegistry) and that stores a limited number of persisted circuits but for a longer period of time (2h is the default).
  • We expect the amount of memory used to persist the circuit state to be in the range of dozens to hundreds of KB.
    • The way we persist state on disconnection is equivalent to the way we do so during prerendering and persisting more than 100Kb starts to degrade the experience. (You wouldn't push 10MB of state to a client on the first request).
  • Keeping state around for longer is cheaper than keeping the circuit for several reasons:
    • The circuit might continue to do work even if disconnected and consume resources like CPU and memory. The persisted state only consumes a fixed amount of memory that the developer is in control of.
    • The persisted state represents a subset of all the memory consumed by the application (we don't have to keep track of the individual components and so on).
  • We retain the persisted circuit state for 2h by default in memory or until we run out of capacity. The default is chosen as a trade-off between the average session duration and the % of circuits that we fail to resume because we discarded the state.
    • Apps need to adjust this to their individual needs based on their user's usage.

[MackinnonBuck]

Looks great so far - still need to do a deeper review of some parts.

[MackinnonBuck]

Looks great!

[dotnet-policy-service]

@@javiercn, this change will be considered for inclusion in the blog post for the release it'll ship in. Nice work!

Please ensure that the original comment in this thread contains a clear explanation of what the change does, why it's important (what problem does it solve?), and, if relevant, include things like code samples and/or performance numbers.

This content may not be exactly what goes into the blog post, but it will help the team putting together the announcement.

Thanks!