Skip to content

Conversation

@hash-worker
Copy link
Contributor

@hash-worker hash-worker bot commented Nov 30, 2025

Note: This PR body was truncated due to platform limits.

This PR contains the following updates:

Package Change Age Confidence
@vitest/coverage-istanbul (source) 3.2.4 -> 4.0.17 age confidence
vitest (source) 3.2.4 -> 4.0.17 age confidence

Warning

Some dependencies could not be looked up. Check the Dependency Dashboard for more information.


Release Notes

vitest-dev/vitest (@​vitest/coverage-istanbul)

v4.0.17

Compare Source

   🚀 Experimental Features
   🐞 Bug Fixes
    View changes on GitHub

v4.0.16

Compare Source

   🐞 Bug Fixes
    View changes on GitHub

v4.0.15

Compare Source

   🚀 Experimental Features
   🐞 Bug Fixes
    View changes on GitHub

v4.0.14

Compare Source

   🚀 Experimental Features
   🐞 Bug Fixes
   🏎 Performance
    View changes on GitHub

v4.0.13

Compare Source

   🐞 Bug Fixes
   🏎 Performance
    View changes on GitHub

v4.0.12

Compare Source

   🐞 Bug Fixes
    View changes on GitHub

v4.0.11

Compare Source

   🚀 Experimental Features
   🏎 Performance
    View changes on GitHub

v4.0.10

Compare Source

   🐞 Bug Fixes
    View changes on GitHub

v4.0.9

Compare Source

   🚀 Experimental Features
   🐞 Bug Fixes
    View changes on GitHub

v4.0.8

Compare Source

   🐞 Bug Fixes
    View changes on GitHub

v4.0.7

Compare Source

   🐞 Bug Fixes
   🏎 Performance
    View changes on GitHub

v4.0.6

Compare Source

   🐞 Bug Fixes
    View changes on GitHub

v4.0.5

Compare Source

   🐞 Bug Fixes
   🏎 Performance
    View changes on GitHub

v4.0.4

Compare Source

   🐞 Bug Fixes
   🏎 Performance
    View changes on GitHub

v4.0.3

Compare Source

   🐞 Bug Fixes
    View changes on GitHub

v4.0.2

Compare Source

   🐞 Bug Fixes
    View changes on GitHub

v4.0.1

Compare Source

   🐞 Bug Fixes
    View changes on GitHub

v4.0.0

Compare Source

Vitest 4.0 is out!

To stay updated, read our blog post and check the migration guide.

   🚨 Breaking Changes

Configuration

📅 Schedule: Branch creation - "before 4am every weekday,every weekend" (UTC), Automerge - At any time (no schedule defined).

🚦 Automerge: Enabled.

Rebasing: Whenever PR becomes conflicted, or you tick the rebase/retry checkbox.

🔕 Ignore: Close this PR and you won't be reminded about these updates again.


  • If you want to rebase/retry this PR, check this box

This PR has been generated by Renovate Bot.

@hash-worker hash-worker bot enabled auto-merge November 30, 2025 14:12
@github-actions github-actions bot added area/deps Relates to third-party dependencies (area) area/apps > hash* Affects HASH (a `hash-*` app) area/apps > hash-api Affects the HASH API (app) area/libs Relates to first-party libraries/crates/packages (area) type/eng > backend Owned by the @backend team area/tests New or updated tests area/tests > integration New or updated integration tests area/apps labels Nov 30, 2025
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 30, 2025

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 60.22%. Comparing base (9e7860c) to head (a53983d).

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #8129      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   60.22%   60.22%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files        1231     1231              
  Lines      117944   117944              
  Branches     5126     5126              
==========================================
- Hits        71031    71029       -2     
- Misses      46087    46089       +2     
  Partials      826      826              
Flag Coverage Δ
apps.hash-ai-worker-ts 1.41% <ø> (ø)
apps.hash-api 0.00% <ø> (ø)
blockprotocol.type-system 40.84% <ø> (ø)
local.claude-hooks 0.00% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-graph-sdk 10.88% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-isomorphic-utils 0.00% <ø> (ø)
rust.antsi 0.00% <ø> (ø)
rust.error-stack 90.88% <ø> (ø)
rust.harpc-codec 84.70% <ø> (ø)
rust.harpc-net 96.14% <ø> (-0.04%) ⬇️
rust.harpc-tower 66.80% <ø> (ø)
rust.harpc-types 0.00% <ø> (ø)
rust.harpc-wire-protocol 92.23% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-codec 72.76% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-api 2.88% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-authorization 62.47% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-postgres-store 25.61% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-store 30.54% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-temporal-versioning 47.95% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-types 0.00% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-validation 83.45% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-ast 87.25% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-compiletest 46.65% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-core 81.77% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-diagnostics 72.43% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-eval 68.54% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-hir 89.10% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-mir 88.00% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-syntax-jexpr 94.05% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

@cursor
Copy link

cursor bot commented Dec 13, 2025

PR Summary

Upgrade testing stack to Vitest v4

  • Bumps vitest and @vitest/coverage-istanbul to 4.0.17 across packages (apps, libs, tests, and hooks)
  • Refreshes yarn.lock with new transitive deps and peer ranges (e.g., obug, updated magicast, istanbul-reports, and removal of istanbul-lib-source-maps), aligning with Vitest v4
  • No application/source code changes; dependency updates only

Written by Cursor Bugbot for commit a53983d. This will update automatically on new commits. Configure here.

"rimraf": "6.1.2",
"typescript": "5.9.3",
"vitest": "3.2.4"
"vitest": "4.0.15"
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Bug: Peer dependency mismatch with @effect/vitest package

The @effect/vitest@0.27.0 package has a peer dependency on vitest: ^3.2.0, but vitest is being upgraded to 4.0.15 which does not satisfy this constraint. Multiple test files in this package import describe and it from @effect/vitest (e.g., JsonDecoder.test.ts, encode.test.ts). This version mismatch could cause test failures or runtime errors since major version changes typically include breaking API changes. The @effect/vitest package needs to be upgraded to a version compatible with vitest 4.x.

Additional Locations (1)

Fix in Cursor Fix in Web

@vercel
Copy link

vercel bot commented Jan 15, 2026

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project Deployment Review Updated (UTC)
ds-theme Ready Ready Preview, Comment Jan 22, 2026 0:58am
hashdotdesign Ready Ready Preview, Comment Jan 22, 2026 0:58am

@codspeed-hq
Copy link

codspeed-hq bot commented Jan 15, 2026

Merging this PR will not alter performance

✅ 18 untouched benchmarks
🗄️ 12 archived benchmarks run1


Comparing deps/js/major-vitest-npm-packages (a53983d) with main (9e7860c)

Open in CodSpeed

Footnotes

  1. 12 benchmarks were run, but are now archived. If they were deleted in another branch, consider rebasing to remove them from the report. Instead if they were added back, click here to restore them.

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

Benchmark results

@rust/hash-graph-benches – Integrations

policy_resolution_large

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2002 $$25.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 224 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-33.717 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$3.26 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.804 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1001 $$11.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 71.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.733 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314 $$41.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 318 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.192 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$13.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 78.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.229 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1526 $$22.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 166 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.535 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078 $$25.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 159 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-48.580 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$3.61 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-83.730 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033 $$13.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 77.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-59.471 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102 $$3.64 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.163 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.87 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.67 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 51 $$3.21 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.265 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269 $$5.02 \mathrm{ms} \pm 23.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.127 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$3.38 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.674 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 107 $$3.96 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.648 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133 $$4.25 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.440 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$3.28 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.172 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63 $$3.84 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.340 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2 $$2.54 \mathrm{ms} \pm 9.64 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.11 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.44 \mathrm{ms} \pm 9.23 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.05 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1 $$2.50 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.02 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8 $$2.84 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.53 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.63 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.19 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3 $$2.79 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.07 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52 $$2.96 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.57 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.63 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.26 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 25 $$2.81 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.40 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94 $$3.29 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.69 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.86 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.50 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 26 $$3.06 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.90 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66 $$3.21 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.47 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.83 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.32 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29 $$3.07 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.50 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth 1 entities $$38.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 187 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.286 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth 10 entities $$75.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 418 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.866 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth 25 entities $$43.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 175 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.547 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth 5 entities $$45.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 211 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.436 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth 50 entities $$53.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 405 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.926 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth 1 entities $$40.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 157 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.334 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth 10 entities $$414 \mathrm{ms} \pm 798 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.119 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth 25 entities $$89.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 455 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.934 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth 5 entities $$84.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 335 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.117 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth 50 entities $$279 \mathrm{ms} \pm 806 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.553 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth 1 entities $$14.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 59.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.749 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth 10 entities $$15.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 80.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.75 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth 25 entities $$15.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 77.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.10 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth 5 entities $$15.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 74.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.17 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth 50 entities $$18.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 96.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.17 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
entity_by_id 1 entities $$14.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 75.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.689 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id 10 entities $$15.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 78.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.02 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id 100 entities $$15.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 82.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.80 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id 1000 entities $$16.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 84.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.78 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id 10000 entities $$24.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 141 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.32 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

representative_read_entity

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/block/v/1 $$31.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 300 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.67 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1 $$31.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 260 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}9.62 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1 $$30.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 263 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.489 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1 $$30.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 261 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.543 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2 $$31.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 286 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.76 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1 $$30.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 304 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.332 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1 $$31.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 306 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.04 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1 $$30.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 318 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.76 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1 $$30.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 319 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.822 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id Account ID: bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba $$8.18 \mathrm{ms} \pm 29.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.986 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
entity_by_property traversal_paths=0 0 $$47.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 191 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.668 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property traversal_paths=255 1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true $$96.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 398 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.20 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false $$53.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 331 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.03 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true $$62.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 275 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.985 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true $$70.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 370 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.683 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true $$76.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 360 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.243 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property traversal_paths=0 0 $$51.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 315 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.757 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property traversal_paths=255 1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true $$77.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 308 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.962 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false $$58.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 314 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.792 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true $$66.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 355 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.254 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true $$67.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 373 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.17 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true $$66.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 320 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.657 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
full_test query-limited $$133 \mathrm{ms} \pm 464 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.421 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
full_test query-unlimited $$133 \mathrm{ms} \pm 542 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.100 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
linked_queries query-limited $$39.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 212 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.23 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
linked_queries query-unlimited $$580 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.15 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}1.35 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

area/apps > hash* Affects HASH (a `hash-*` app) area/apps > hash-api Affects the HASH API (app) area/apps area/deps Relates to third-party dependencies (area) area/libs Relates to first-party libraries/crates/packages (area) area/tests > integration New or updated integration tests area/tests New or updated tests type/eng > backend Owned by the @backend team

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants