BE-254: Add CodSpeed benchmarking for HashQL MIR transformation passes by indietyp · Pull Request #8204 · hashintel/hash

indietyp · 2025-12-19T21:38:17Z

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

Add CodSpeed benchmarking support to the repository, enabling performance tracking for Rust code.

Adding inline to the successor iterator gave us another 5-10% in speed, as this happened to be cross crate (hashql-mir -> hashql-core -> hashql-mir).

🔗 Related links

CodSpeed Documentation

🔍 What does this change?

Adds a new GitHub workflow for running CodSpeed benchmarks
Integrates cargo-codspeed tool in mise configuration
Converts the existing Criterion benchmarks in hashql-mir to use CodSpeed's Criterion compatibility layer
Adds allocation limit control methods to the Heap implementation
Adds a build:codspeed script to the hashql-mir package.json

Pre-Merge Checklist 🚀

🚢 Has this modified a publishable library?

This PR:

does not modify any publishable blocks or libraries, or modifications do not need publishing

📜 Does this require a change to the docs?

The changes in this PR:

are internal and do not require a docs change

🕸️ Does this require a change to the Turbo Graph?

The changes in this PR:

affected the execution graph, and the turbo.json's have been updated to reflect this

🛡 What tests cover this?

The benchmarks themselves serve as tests for the functionality

❓ How to test this?

Run turbo run build:codspeed --filter=hashql-mir to verify the benchmark builds
Run cargo codspeed run to execute codspeed benchmarks locally

cursor · 2025-12-19T21:38:23Z

PR Summary

Sets up CodSpeed performance benchmarking and adapts MIR transform benches to run under it.

Adds CodSpeed Benchmarks workflow (.github/workflows/codspeed.yml) and Turbo tasks build:codspeed/test:codspeed; wires package scripts in @rust/hashql-mir
Installs cargo-codspeed in .config/mise/config.toml and adds codspeed-criterion-compat to workspace deps; updates Cargo.lock
Migrates libs/@local/hashql/mir/benches/transform.rs from Criterion to codspeed-criterion-compat (uses iter_batched_ref, criterion_group!, criterion_main!), and registers a [[bench]] in hashql-mir/Cargo.toml
Extends heap APIs: Allocator::set_allocation_limit, Heap::set_allocation_limit, Scratch::with_capacity; adds inlining to CFG successor/iterator methods

^{Written by Cursor Bugbot for commit 90ffaed. This will update automatically on new commits. Configure here.}

indietyp · 2025-12-19T21:38:42Z

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

codecov · 2025-12-19T21:43:42Z

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 0% with 11 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 59.02%. Comparing base (04285dd) to head (90ffaed).
⚠️ Report is 20 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
libs/@local/hashql/core/src/heap/scratch.rs	0.00%	5 Missing ⚠️
libs/@local/hashql/core/src/heap/allocator.rs	0.00%	3 Missing ⚠️
libs/@local/hashql/core/src/heap/mod.rs	0.00%	3 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #8204      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   59.02%   59.02%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files        1187     1187              
  Lines      112486   112497      +11     
  Branches     4939     4939              
==========================================
+ Hits        66394    66396       +2     
- Misses      45334    45343       +9     
  Partials      758      758

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	`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	`96.19% <ø> (+0.03%)`	⬆️
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	`2.89% <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	`82.32% <0.00%> (-0.05%)`	⬇️
rust.hashql-diagnostics	`72.43% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hashql-eval	`68.54% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hashql-hir	`89.10% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hashql-mir	`88.18% <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.

.github/workflows/codspeed.yml

libs/@local/hashql/mir/package.json

codspeed-hq · 2025-12-19T22:11:02Z

CodSpeed Performance Report

Congrats! CodSpeed is installed 🎉

🆕 13 new benchmarks were detected.

You will start to see performance impacts in the reports once the benchmarks are run from your default branch.

Detected benchmarks

complex: 25.2 µs
complex: 19.3 µs
linear: 17.9 µs
diamond: 20.6 µs
diamond: 17.7 µs
dead stores: 12.2 µs
linear: 8.7 µs
complex: 60.2 µs
diamond: 15.9 µs
complex: 24.2 µs
diamond: 44 µs
linear: 12.4 µs
linear: 31.1 µs

github-actions · 2025-12-28T12:27:56Z

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	$$25.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 167 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.564 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.17 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.373 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1001	$$11.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 75.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.702 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314	$$41.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 313 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.451 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$13.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 93.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.60 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1526	$$22.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 136 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.653 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078	$$25.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 174 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-39.060 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.59 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-81.949 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033	$$13.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 98.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-50.938 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102	$$3.64 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.59 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.81 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.548 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 51	$$3.17 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.092 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269	$$4.95 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.498 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.38 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.347 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 107	$$3.92 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.214 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133	$$4.22 \mathrm{ms} \pm 23.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.633 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.28 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.18 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63	$$3.79 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.775 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2	$$2.55 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.23 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.45 \mathrm{ms} \pm 9.15 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.42 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1	$$2.58 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.26 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8	$$2.76 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.21 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.65 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.72 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3	$$2.84 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.84 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52	$$2.88 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.67 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.59 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.10 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 25	$$2.75 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.45 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94	$$3.24 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.95 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.81 \mathrm{ms} \pm 9.50 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.26 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 26	$$3.06 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.30 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66	$$3.14 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.33 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.80 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.13 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29	$$3.03 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.80 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth	1 entities	$$38.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 130 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.62 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	10 entities	$$76.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 363 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.04 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	25 entities	$$43.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 200 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.58 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	5 entities	$$45.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 251 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.04 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	50 entities	$$53.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 257 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.31 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	1 entities	$$40.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 160 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.12 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	10 entities	$$418 \mathrm{ms} \pm 730 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.148 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	25 entities	$$95.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 385 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.27 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	5 entities	$$84.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 320 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.297 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	50 entities	$$259 \mathrm{ms} \pm 565 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.329 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	1 entities	$$14.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 75.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.14 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	10 entities	$$14.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 71.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.93 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	25 entities	$$14.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 53.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.662 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	5 entities	$$14.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 58.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.27 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	50 entities	$$17.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 108 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.437 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$14.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 59.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.724 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$14.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 61.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.93 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	100 entities	$$14.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 66.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.10 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	1000 entities	$$15.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 71.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.10 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10000 entities	$$22.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 154 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.31 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	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`	$$30.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 228 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.76 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1`	$$29.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 244 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.073 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1`	$$29.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 279 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.460 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1`	$$29.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 254 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.951 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2`	$$28.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 271 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.257 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1`	$$29.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 303 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.44 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1`	$$29.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 260 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.204 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1`	$$29.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 301 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.284 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1`	$$30.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 290 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.91 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id	Account ID: `bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba`	$$8.06 \mathrm{ms} \pm 34.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.76 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$45.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 231 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.823 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$92.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 358 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.047 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$51.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 262 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.254 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$59.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 440 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.123 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$67.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 402 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.601 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$73.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 352 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.574 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$48.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 234 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.510 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$76.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 438 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.100 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$55.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 269 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.451 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$62.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 262 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.756 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$66.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 491 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.448 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$66.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 336 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.23 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
full_test	query-limited	$$140 \mathrm{ms} \pm 459 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.32 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
full_test	query-unlimited	$$137 \mathrm{ms} \pm 581 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.65 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-limited	$$39.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 189 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-61.444 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-unlimited	$$582 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.17 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}2.81 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

indietyp · 2026-01-16T12:45:18Z

Merge activity

Jan 16, 12:45 PM UTC: A user started a stack merge that includes this pull request via Graphite.

indietyp added 4 commits December 19, 2025 22:03

fix: move to iter_batched

1ea5754

feat: use iter_batched_ref instead

b5f9fc8

fix: lints

bcaa619

feat: CI

12785da

graphite-app bot assigned indietyp Dec 19, 2025

fix: workspace dep

08dbc5e

github-actions bot added area/deps Relates to third-party dependencies (area) area/infra Relates to version control, CI, CD or IaC (area) area/libs Relates to first-party libraries/crates/packages (area) type/eng > backend Owned by the @backend team labels Dec 19, 2025

vercel bot deployed to Preview – hashdotdesign December 19, 2025 21:41 View deployment

vercel bot deployed to Preview – petrinaut December 19, 2025 21:43 View deployment

indietyp added 2 commits December 19, 2025 22:46

fix: register build:codspeed

5c33ae4

fix: pin codspeed

79b0412

vercel bot deployed to Preview – hashdotdesign December 19, 2025 21:50 View deployment

vercel bot deployed to Preview – petrinaut December 19, 2025 21:51 View deployment

fix: CI

7941db3

graphite-app bot reviewed Dec 19, 2025

View reviewed changes

.github/workflows/codspeed.yml Show resolved Hide resolved

libs/@local/hashql/mir/package.json Show resolved Hide resolved

vercel bot deployed to Preview – hashdotdesign December 19, 2025 22:02 View deployment

chore: explicitely set instrumentation target

2f1a9f7

vercel bot deployed to Preview – hashdotdesign December 19, 2025 22:06 View deployment

chore: hardcode hashql-mir (for now)

1b3751b

vercel bot deployed to Preview – hashdotdesign December 19, 2025 22:11 View deployment

chore: put test command into separate package.json command

36257cf

vercel bot deployed to Preview – hashdotdesign December 19, 2025 22:16 View deployment

vercel bot deployed to Preview – petrinaut December 19, 2025 22:17 View deployment

vercel bot deployed to Preview – hash December 28, 2025 11:31 View deployment

This was referenced Jan 8, 2026

BE-257: HashQL: Implement MIR interpreter with runtime value representation #8245

Merged

BE-272: HashQL: Add numeric addition and subtraction operators to MIR #8250

Merged

BE-273: HashQL: Profile and benchmark MIR interpreter #8251

Merged

TimDiekmann approved these changes Jan 15, 2026

View reviewed changes

indietyp added this pull request to the merge queue Jan 15, 2026

Merged via the queue into main with commit 1892655 Jan 15, 2026
172 checks passed

indietyp deleted the bm/be-254-experiment-around-with-codspeed branch January 15, 2026 10:48

This was referenced Jan 20, 2026

BE-301: HashQL: Implement size estimation analysis for MIR #8278

Open

BE-315: HashQL: Add GraphReadFilter source variant to MIR #8323

Open

BE-317: HashQL: Implement TraversalExtraction pass #8331

Open

Conversation

indietyp commented Dec 19, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

🔗 Related links

🔍 What does this change?

Pre-Merge Checklist 🚀

🚢 Has this modified a publishable library?

📜 Does this require a change to the docs?

🕸️ Does this require a change to the Turbo Graph?

🛡 What tests cover this?

❓ How to test this?

Uh oh!

cursor bot commented Dec 19, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

PR Summary

Uh oh!

indietyp commented Dec 19, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Dec 19, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

codspeed-hq bot commented Dec 19, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

CodSpeed Performance Report

Congrats! CodSpeed is installed 🎉

Detected benchmarks

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Dec 28, 2025

Benchmark results

@rust/hash-graph-benches – Integrations

policy_resolution_large

policy_resolution_medium

policy_resolution_none

policy_resolution_small

read_scaling_complete

read_scaling_linkless

representative_read_entity

representative_read_entity_type

representative_read_multiple_entities

scenarios

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

indietyp commented Jan 16, 2026

Merge activity

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

indietyp commented Dec 19, 2025 •

edited

Loading

cursor bot commented Dec 19, 2025 •

edited

Loading

indietyp commented Dec 19, 2025 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Dec 19, 2025 •

edited

Loading

codspeed-hq bot commented Dec 19, 2025 •

edited

Loading