Do not try to refcount solution syncing when communicating with OOP

[CyrusNajmabadi]

This logic is correct on the OOP side. However, on the client side it is broken. Specifically, consider this set of interleaved concurrent operations on the client side and OOP:

Client Side:

1. Operation 1 starts up creating a scope<->solution-state mapping. (scopeId 0)
2. Operation 2 starts up (on same solution snapshot) creating a scope<->solution-state mapping. (scopeId 1)
3. Operation 1 cancels, and disposes it's mapping.

OOP side:

1. Operation 1 is received and creates a syncing operation to take hydrate the solution corresponding to its checksum.
2. Operation 2 is received and sees an existing syncing operation to hydrate the solution. It attaches itself to that, increasing the refcount.
3. On hte client side operation 1 is canceled. This cancels operation1 on the OOP side (but not the syncing operation, which is refcounted). Operation 2 continues to wait on this syncing operation. This syncing operation then crashes on the client side because it refers to scopeId-0, which has been removed from the mapping on the host.

The real fix here will need to be that on the client side we keep these checksum->scope-id mappings around with a refcount as well, so that we only remove from teh client mapping once all concurrent calls actually finish.

In the meantime though, stop trying to share the syncing computation and instead have all calls create their own concurrent sync that is safe from other operations being canceled.

[dibarbet]

am OK with the directives as long as the plan is to bring it back with fixes soon

[CyrusNajmabadi]

am OK with the directives as long as the plan is to bring it back with fixes soon

Yup. WOrking on that PR now :)