Skip to content

Update Rust crate nextest-filtering to 0.20.0#8314

Open
hash-worker[bot] wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
deps/rs/nextest-filtering-0.x
Open

Update Rust crate nextest-filtering to 0.20.0#8314
hash-worker[bot] wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
deps/rs/nextest-filtering-0.x

Conversation

@hash-worker
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@hash-worker hash-worker bot commented Jan 24, 2026

This PR contains the following updates:

Package Type Update Change
nextest-filtering workspace.dependencies minor 0.17.0 -> 0.20.0

Warning

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


Release Notes

nextest-rs/nextest (nextest-filtering)

v0.20.0: nextest-filtering 0.20.0

Compare Source

Changed
  • winnow updated to 1.0.0.

v0.19.0: nextest-filtering 0.19.0

Compare Source

Changed
  • nextest-metadata updated to 0.14.0.
  • MSRV updated to Rust 1.91.

v0.18.0: nextest-filtering 0.18.0

Compare Source

Changed
  • TestQuery::test_name is now a &TestCaseName instead of &str.

Configuration

📅 Schedule: Branch creation - "before 4am every weekday,every weekend" (UTC), Automerge - "before 4am every weekday,every weekend" (UTC).

🚦 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 this update 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 January 24, 2026 07:42
@cursor
Copy link
Copy Markdown

cursor bot commented Jan 24, 2026

PR Summary

Low Risk
Primarily a dependency bump for test filtering logic; risk is limited to potential changes in test selection/metadata parsing and build resolution across platforms.

Overview
Updates workspace dependency nextest-filtering from 0.17.0 to 0.20.0.

Regenerates Cargo.lock to reflect updated transitive dependencies, including pulling in nextest-metadata 0.14.0 alongside the existing 0.12.3 entry and adjusting several platform crates (e.g., windows-sys/socket2/getrandom) to the versions selected by the new resolution.

Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 610fbc1. Bugbot is set up for automated code reviews on this repo. Configure here.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the area/deps Relates to third-party dependencies (area) label Jan 24, 2026
@augmentcode
Copy link
Copy Markdown

augmentcode bot commented Jan 24, 2026

🤖 Augment PR Summary

Summary: Bumps the workspace Rust dependency nextest-filtering from 0.17.0 to 0.18.0.
Technical note: The 0.18.0 release changes TestQuery::test_name from &str to &TestCaseName, which may require updating downstream call sites.

🤖 Was this summary useful? React with 👍 or 👎

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@augmentcode augmentcode bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Review completed. 1 suggestions posted.

Fix All in Augment

Comment augment review to trigger a new review at any time.

Cargo.toml Outdated
napi-build = { version = "2.2.4", default-features = false }
napi-derive = { version = "2.16.13", default-features = false }
nextest-filtering = { version = "0.17.0", default-features = false }
nextest-filtering = { version = "0.18.0", default-features = false }
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

nextest-filtering 0.18.0 changes TestQuery::test_name to &TestCaseName; libs/@local/hashql/compiletest/src/executor/trial.rs currently constructs TestQuery { test_name: &test_name }, which is likely to break with this bump. Consider ensuring that call site (and any similar ones) are updated as part of this version upgrade.

Other Locations
  • libs/@local/hashql/compiletest/src/executor/trial.rs:132

Fix This in Augment

🤖 Was this useful? React with 👍 or 👎

@codspeed-hq
Copy link
Copy Markdown

codspeed-hq bot commented Jan 24, 2026

Merging this PR will not alter performance

✅ 56 untouched benchmarks
⏩ 24 skipped benchmarks1


Comparing deps/rs/nextest-filtering-0.x (610fbc1) with main (72b0a7b)2

Open in CodSpeed

Footnotes

  1. 24 benchmarks were skipped, so the baseline results were used instead. If they were deleted from the codebase, click here and archive them to remove them from the performance reports.

  2. No successful run was found on main (b03f6fe) during the generation of this report, so 72b0a7b was used instead as the comparison base. There might be some changes unrelated to this pull request in this report.

@codecov
Copy link
Copy Markdown

codecov bot commented Jan 24, 2026

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 62.50%. Comparing base (a70891f) to head (610fbc1).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #8314      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   62.50%   62.50%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files        1318     1318              
  Lines      134219   134224       +5     
  Branches     5518     5518              
==========================================
- Hits        83895    83893       -2     
- Misses      49409    49416       +7     
  Partials      915      915              
Flag Coverage Δ
apps.hash-ai-worker-ts 1.40% <ø> (ø)
apps.hash-api 0.00% <ø> (ø)
blockprotocol.type-system 40.84% <ø> (ø)
local.claude-hooks 0.00% <ø> (ø)
local.harpc-client 51.24% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-graph-sdk 9.63% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-isomorphic-utils 0.00% <ø> (ø)
rust.antsi 0.00% <ø> (ø)
rust.error-stack 90.87% <ø> (ø)
rust.harpc-codec 84.70% <ø> (ø)
rust.harpc-net 96.18% <ø> (-0.04%) ⬇️
rust.harpc-tower 67.03% <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 2.52% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-authorization 62.34% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-postgres-store 26.38% <ø> (-0.01%) ⬇️
rust.hash-graph-store 37.76% <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-core 82.29% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-diagnostics 72.43% <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.

@hash-worker hash-worker bot requested a review from a team January 24, 2026 08:47
@hash-worker hash-worker bot force-pushed the deps/rs/nextest-filtering-0.x branch from 8839ef0 to b602be3 Compare January 28, 2026 14:51
@vercel
Copy link
Copy Markdown

vercel bot commented Jan 28, 2026

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

Project Deployment Actions Updated (UTC)
hash Ready Ready Preview, Comment Apr 3, 2026 11:09pm
hashdotdesign Ready Ready Preview, Comment Apr 3, 2026 11:09pm
hashdotdesign-tokens Ready Ready Preview, Comment Apr 3, 2026 11:09pm
petrinaut Ready Ready Preview Apr 3, 2026 11:09pm

@hash-worker hash-worker bot force-pushed the deps/rs/nextest-filtering-0.x branch from b602be3 to 7ac4835 Compare February 3, 2026 10:52
@hash-worker hash-worker bot force-pushed the deps/rs/nextest-filtering-0.x branch from 7ac4835 to 4ba8ce5 Compare February 9, 2026 13:40
@hash-worker hash-worker bot force-pushed the deps/rs/nextest-filtering-0.x branch from 4ba8ce5 to 714e0fa Compare February 17, 2026 09:27
@hash-worker hash-worker bot force-pushed the deps/rs/nextest-filtering-0.x branch from 9534ada to beeaa3b Compare March 23, 2026 13:45
@hash-worker hash-worker bot changed the title Update Rust crate nextest-filtering to 0.20.0 Update Rust crate nextest-filtering to 0.19.0 Mar 23, 2026
@hash-worker hash-worker bot force-pushed the deps/rs/nextest-filtering-0.x branch from beeaa3b to 201e378 Compare March 23, 2026 22:54
@hash-worker hash-worker bot changed the title Update Rust crate nextest-filtering to 0.19.0 Update Rust crate nextest-filtering to 0.20.0 Mar 23, 2026
@hash-worker hash-worker bot force-pushed the deps/rs/nextest-filtering-0.x branch from 201e378 to 41d8a9a Compare March 31, 2026 17:09
@hash-worker hash-worker bot changed the title Update Rust crate nextest-filtering to 0.20.0 Update Rust crate nextest-filtering to 0.19.0 Mar 31, 2026
@hash-worker hash-worker bot force-pushed the deps/rs/nextest-filtering-0.x branch from 41d8a9a to 610fbc1 Compare April 3, 2026 22:56
@hash-worker hash-worker bot changed the title Update Rust crate nextest-filtering to 0.19.0 Update Rust crate nextest-filtering to 0.20.0 Apr 3, 2026
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@cursor cursor bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Cursor Bugbot has reviewed your changes and found 1 potential issue.

Fix All in Cursor

Bugbot Autofix prepared a fix for the issue found in the latest run.

  • ✅ Fixed: Version bumped to 0.20.0 instead of intended 0.19.0
    • I changed nextest-filtering to 0.19.0 in Cargo.toml and regenerated Cargo.lock so the resolved package is also 0.19.0.

Create PR

Or push these changes by commenting:

@cursor push 62fd1fd68f
Preview (62fd1fd68f)
diff --git a/Cargo.lock b/Cargo.lock
--- a/Cargo.lock
+++ b/Cargo.lock
@@ -5659,9 +5659,9 @@
 
 [[package]]
 name = "nextest-filtering"
-version = "0.20.0"
+version = "0.19.0"
 source = "registry+https://github.com/rust-lang/crates.io-index"
-checksum = "c34d722a8c4d1d19a7e64c15d3e2f13c3783ddc01b1d3df63dae137364d5708c"
+checksum = "0920388f3b398d502409350a387ff13807048e0653e8f291a9b2582427ab1c61"
 dependencies = [
  "globset",
  "guppy",
@@ -5673,7 +5673,7 @@
  "regex-syntax",
  "smol_str",
  "thiserror 2.0.18",
- "winnow 1.0.0",
+ "winnow 0.7.15",
 ]
 
 [[package]]
@@ -10849,9 +10849,6 @@
 version = "1.0.0"
 source = "registry+https://github.com/rust-lang/crates.io-index"
 checksum = "a90e88e4667264a994d34e6d1ab2d26d398dcdca8b7f52bec8668957517fc7d8"
-dependencies = [
- "memchr",
-]
 
 [[package]]
 name = "winreg"

diff --git a/Cargo.toml b/Cargo.toml
--- a/Cargo.toml
+++ b/Cargo.toml
@@ -194,7 +194,7 @@
 napi                               = { version = "2.16.17", default-features = false }
 napi-build                         = { version = "2.2.4", default-features = false }
 napi-derive                        = { version = "2.16.13", default-features = false }
-nextest-filtering                  = { version = "0.20.0", default-features = false }
+nextest-filtering                  = { version = "0.19.0", default-features = false }
 nextest-metadata                   = { version = "0.12.2", default-features = false }
 nodejs_package_json                = { version = "0.4.4" }
 opentelemetry                      = { version = "0.30.0", default-features = false }

This Bugbot Autofix run was free. To enable autofix for future PRs, go to the Cursor dashboard.

Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 610fbc1. Configure here.

napi-build = { version = "2.2.4", default-features = false }
napi-derive = { version = "2.16.13", default-features = false }
nextest-filtering = { version = "0.17.0", default-features = false }
nextest-filtering = { version = "0.20.0", default-features = false }
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Version bumped to 0.20.0 instead of intended 0.19.0

High Severity

The PR title and description indicate updating nextest-filtering from 0.17.0 to 0.19.0, with 0.20.0 listed as a separate "Pending" future update. However, the actual Cargo.toml change specifies version 0.20.0. This pulls in an unreviewed version that may contain additional breaking changes beyond what the PR release notes cover (which only document up to 0.19.0). The same mismatch appears in Cargo.lock, where the resolved version is 0.20.0.

Fix in Cursor Fix in Web

Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 610fbc1. Configure here.

@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Apr 4, 2026

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 $$25.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 139 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.625 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.77 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.009 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1001 $$11.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 79.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.366 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314 $$37.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 322 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.880 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$11.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 77.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.599 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1526 $$20.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 125 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.033 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078 $$26.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 133 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.768 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$3.11 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.30 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033 $$12.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 104 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.593 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102 $$3.10 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.815 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.41 \mathrm{ms} \pm 9.61 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.947 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 51 $$2.71 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.445 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269 $$4.47 \mathrm{ms} \pm 27.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.01 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.88 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.401 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 107 $$3.48 \mathrm{ms} \pm 28.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.67 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133 $$3.77 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.42 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.78 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.206 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63 $$3.41 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.280 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2 $$2.14 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.701 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.16 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.46 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1 $$2.20 \mathrm{ms} \pm 8.44 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.500 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8 $$2.41 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.031 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.26 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.257 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3 $$2.52 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.430 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52 $$2.50 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.31 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.20 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.933 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 25 $$2.31 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.331 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94 $$2.79 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.218 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.46 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.138 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 26 $$2.63 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.225 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66 $$2.73 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.906 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.42 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.928 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29 $$2.69 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.78 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth 1 entities $$37.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 143 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.166 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth 10 entities $$78.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 274 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.31 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth 25 entities $$42.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 241 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.593 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth 5 entities $$46.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 190 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.004 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth 50 entities $$53.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 370 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.879 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth 1 entities $$39.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 187 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.633 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth 10 entities $$414 \mathrm{ms} \pm 762 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.187 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth 25 entities $$87.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 341 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.387 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth 5 entities $$90.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 294 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.493 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth 50 entities $$257 \mathrm{ms} \pm 699 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.492 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth 1 entities $$17.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 94.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.07 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth 10 entities $$17.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 91.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.532 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth 25 entities $$17.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 84.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.336 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth 5 entities $$17.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 86.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.78 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth 50 entities $$21.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 96.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.75 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
entity_by_id 1 entities $$17.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 86.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.32 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id 10 entities $$16.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 77.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.299 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id 100 entities $$16.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 104 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.378 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id 1000 entities $$17.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 79.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.32 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id 10000 entities $$24.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 207 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.94 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ 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 $$32.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 305 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.37 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1 $$32.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 297 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.10 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1 $$30.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 255 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.77 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1 $$31.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 291 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.40 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2 $$32.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 282 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.40 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1 $$31.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 293 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.868 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1 $$30.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 289 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.869 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1 $$30.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 310 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.448 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1 $$31.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 274 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.010 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id Account ID: bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba $$6.92 \mathrm{ms} \pm 34.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.43 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
entity_by_property traversal_paths=0 0 $$95.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 388 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.00 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property traversal_paths=255 1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true $$139 \mathrm{ms} \pm 553 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.21 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false $$98.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 482 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.50 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true $$106 \mathrm{ms} \pm 425 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.12 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true $$116 \mathrm{ms} \pm 501 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.20 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true $$121 \mathrm{ms} \pm 526 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.42 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property traversal_paths=0 0 $$99.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 377 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.50 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property traversal_paths=255 1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true $$121 \mathrm{ms} \pm 615 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.256 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false $$104 \mathrm{ms} \pm 465 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.234 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true $$115 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.36 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}3.56 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true $$112 \mathrm{ms} \pm 459 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.754 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true $$113 \mathrm{ms} \pm 462 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.37 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
full_test query-limited $$123 \mathrm{ms} \pm 580 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.057 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
full_test query-unlimited $$132 \mathrm{ms} \pm 445 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.025 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
linked_queries query-limited $$90.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 660 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.769 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
linked_queries query-unlimited $$503 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.49 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.631 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

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

Labels

area/deps Relates to third-party dependencies (area)

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants