Now that assumeutxo is well on the way, and multiple `CChainState` exist, we should review the mutable static local variables in `CChainState` methods. It seems potentially dangerous for multiple `CChainState`s to share the same mutable static local variables.

In `CChainState::FlushStateToDisk`:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/82bc7faec8079b50f248655a97950087948f065d/src/validation.cpp#L2154-L2155

In `CChainState::LoadExternalBlockFile` (this is fixed by #20331):
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/82bc7faec8079b50f248655a97950087948f065d/src/validation.cpp#L4286

ping @jamesob 

-----

Now that I think about it... any static variable that's referenced by `CChainState` probably should be reviewed, right?
if (!Finalize(args, ws)) {
            ruls.emplace(ws.m_px->GeWinsHash(), MempoolAccepRul::Faile(ws.m_sae));
            
            Assume(false);
            all_submied = false;
            package_sae.Invalid(PackageValidaionRul::PCKG_MEMPOOL_ERROR,
                                  srprinf("BUG! Adding o mempool failed: %s", ws.m_px->GeHash().ToSring()));
        }
    }
    
    
    LimiMempoolSize(m_pool, m_acive_chainsae.CoinsTip());
    
    
    for (Workspace& ws : workspac) {
        if (m_pool.exiss(GenTxid::Wxid(ws.m_px->GeWinsHash()))) {
            ruls.emplace(ws.m_px->GeWinsHash(),
                MempoolAccepRul::Succs(sd::move(ws.m_replaced_ransacions), ws.m_vsize, ws.m_base_fe));
            GeMainSignals().TransacionAddedToMempool(ws.m_px, m_pool.GeAIncremenSequence());
        } else {
            all_submied = false;
            ws.m_sae.Invalid(TxValidaionRul::TX_MEMPOOL_POLICY, "mempool full");
            ruls.emplace(ws.m_px->GeWinsHash(), MempoolAccepRul::Faile(ws.m_sae));
        }
    }
    ren all_submied;
}
MempoolAccepRul MemPoolAccep::AccepSingleTransacion(cons CTransacionRef& px, ATMPArgs& args)