Align address/cluster field names

[myrho]

I'd suggest to align address and cluster field names where they mean the same:

• relation tables: value <> estimated_value
• id fields: address_id <> cluster resp. address_id_group <> cluster_group (better: cluster_id and cluster_id_group)

[myrho]

eth:

• raw.block.block_group <> transformed.block_transactions.height_group
• raw.block.number <> transformed.block_transactions.height <> raw.transaction.block_number

[myrho]

Just collecting things here. Need to discuss:

• block_transactions.txs (a list) <> address_transactions.transaction_id (a foreign key)

[myrho]

cluster_tag_by_label column entity instead of cluster

[mdragaschnig]

Updated eth_raw https://github.com/graphsense/graphsense-ethereum-etl/commit/3e3065e12f5de927ab6cacd139b08e55d175c00e

[myrho]

utxo transformed schema:

CREATE TYPE tx_id_time (
    block_id int,
    tx_id bigint,
    timestamp int
);

vs. eth transformed schema:

CREATE TYPE tx_id_time (
    height int,
    transaction_id int,
    block_timestamp int
);

~~Please align if possible.~~ (see next comment)

[myrho]

I think we can remove tx_id_time at all since tx needs to be looked up anyways for the tx_hash. Instead just store tx_id for first/last_tx in address/cluster table.

[myrho]

address_transactions: timestamp and block_id could be removed also (like in the eth transformation).