I think that if a reorg fails due to an error while disconnecting blocks, the node should shut down.

My thought is that if we are trying to switch to a more work chain and something goes wrong before we can even try to validate that more-work chain, then we have a problem that is not related to the chain we're trying to switch to but instead related to our own hardware or software; shutting down and having the user deal with the issue is better than continuing on, when we know there's a more work chain that we're unable to try validating.

This has recently come up on testnet, where unpatched nodes are unable to reorg from the invalid chain containing the duplicate-input-in-a-transaction block, but rather than crash or shutdown they are continuing on the invalid chain, with messages like this in the debug log:

```
ERROR: DisconnectTip(): DisconnectBlock 00000000210004840364b52bc5e455d888f164e4264a4fec06a514b67e9d5722 failed
```
unsigned int nBlockSize = ::GetSerializeSize(block, CLIENT_VERSION);
    CDiskBlockPos blockPos;
    if (dbp != nullptr)
        blockPos = *dbp;
    if (!FindBlockPos(blockPos, nBlockSize+8, nHeight, block.GetBlockTime(), dbp != nullptr)) {
        error("%s: FindBlockPos failed", __func__);
        return CDiskBlockPos();
    }
    if (dbp == nullptr) {
        if (!WriteBlockToDisk(block, blockPos, chainparams.MessageStart())) {
            AbortNode("Failed to write block");
            return CDiskBlockPos();
        }
    }
    return blockPos;
}
bool CChainState::AcceptBlock(const std::shared_ptr<const CBlock>& pblock, CValidationState& state, const CChainParams& chainparams, CBlockIndex** ppindex, bool fRequested, const CDiskBlockPos* dbp, bool* fNewBlock)
{
    const CBlock& block = *pblock;
    if (fNewBlock) *fNewBlock = false;
    AssertLockHeld(cs_main);
    CBlockIndex *pindexDummy = nullptr;