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
```
fScriptChecks = (GetBlockProofEquivalentTime(*pindexBestHeader, *pindex, *pindexBestHeader, chainparams.GetConsensus()) <= 60 * 60 * 24 * 7 * 2);
            }
        }
    }
    int64_t nTime1 = GetTimeMicros(); nTimeCheck += nTime1 - nTimeStart;
    LogPrint(BCLog::BENCH, "    - Sanity checks: %.2fms [%.2fs (%.2fms/blk)]\n", MILLI * (nTime1 - nTimeStart), nTimeCheck * MICRO, nTimeCheck * MILLI / nBlocksTotal);
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    bool fEnforceBIP30 = !((pindex->nHeight==91842 && pindex->GetBlockHash() == uint256S("0x00000000000a4d0a398161ffc163c503763b1f4360639393e0e4c8e300e0caec")) ||
                           (pindex->nHeight==91880 && pindex->GetBlockHash() == uint256S("0x00000000000743f190a18c5577a3c2d2a1f610ae9601ac046a38084ccb7cd721")));