BE-260: HashQL: Switch to bump allocator with scoping support by indietyp · Pull Request #8218 · hashintel/hash

indietyp · 2025-12-26T18:41:29Z

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

Replace bumpalo with bump-scope for arena allocation in hashql. This allows us to do intermediary allocations, such as in tight loops, without requiring a whole new allocator. Support for that has been in the works in bumpalo for a long time, without any progress. And bump-scope specifically I've had on my radar for 1+ years.

🔍 What does this change?

Replaces the bumpalo dependency with bump-scope for arena allocation
Refactors the BumpAllocator trait into two separate traits:
- BumpAllocator: Core bump allocation with scoped arenas and slice copying
- ResetAllocator: Adds bulk deallocation via reset
Adds support for scoped allocations with the new scoped method
Makes allocate_slice_copy infallible with a fallible try_allocate_slice_copy variant
Updates all implementations and callers to use the new API

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:

do not affect the execution graph

🛡 What tests cover this?

Existing tests continue to cover the functionality, as this is primarily an internal implementation change.

❓ How to test this?

Run the existing test suite to verify that all functionality works with the new allocator
Verify that performance is maintained or improved with the new implementation

cursor · 2025-12-26T18:41:35Z

PR Summary

Replaces bumpalo with bump-scope and overhauls the arena allocation API to enable scoped allocations and clearer reset semantics.

Introduces heap::BumpAllocator with scoped support and try_allocate_slice_copy, plus allocate_slice_copy as infallible wrapper
Adds heap::ResetAllocator trait; updates passes and benchmarks to require ResetAllocator where reset() is used
Implements allocator wrapper over bump_scope (Allocator, AllocatorScope); updates Heap/Scratch to use scoping and implement new traits
Refactors heap::transfer::TransferInto to provide both fallible and infallible transfer for &[T]/&str
Removes Heap::set_allocation_limit and associated usage; adapts capacity and alloc paths to bump_scope
Fixes TryCloneIn for Box<[T]> to reallocate when lengths differ
Cargo: drop bumpalo, add bump-scope; adjust lockfile and allocator-related deps

^{Written by Cursor Bugbot for commit 226e70c. This will update automatically on new commits. Configure here.}

indietyp · 2025-12-26T18:42:10Z

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

codecov · 2025-12-26T18:47:10Z

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 59.37%. Comparing base (bf829ac) to head (226e70c).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #8218      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   59.24%   59.37%   +0.12%     
==========================================
  Files        1191     1195       +4     
  Lines      113363   113736     +373     
  Branches     4981     4985       +4     
==========================================
+ Hits        67159    67527     +368     
- Misses      45428    45433       +5     
  Partials      776      776

Flag	Coverage Δ
local.harpc-client	`51.24% <ø> (ø)`
rust.error-stack	`90.88% <ø> (ø)`
rust.harpc-net	`96.16% <ø> (ø)`
rust.harpc-tower	`66.80% <ø> (ø)`
rust.harpc-types	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
rust.harpc-wire-protocol	`92.23% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hash-graph-api	`2.89% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hash-graph-authorization	`62.47% <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-hir	`89.10% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hashql-mir	`88.51% <ø> (+0.27%)`	⬆️
rust.hashql-syntax-jexpr	`94.05% <ø> (-0.01%)`	⬇️

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.

augmentcode · 2025-12-26T18:47:45Z

🤖 Augment PR Summary

Summary: Migrates HashQL’s arena allocation from bumpalo to bump-scope to enable nested/scoped sub-arenas for short-lived intermediate allocations.

Changes:

Replace bumpalo with bump-scope in hashql-core, including lockfile updates.
Rework the internal arena wrapper to support scoped allocation via a new AllocatorScope type.
Split the allocator API into BumpAllocator (scoping + slice copy) and ResetAllocator (bulk reset()).
Add scoped(..) support across allocators to rewind temporary allocations at scope exit.
Make allocate_slice_copy infallible (panic-on-OOM) and introduce try_allocate_slice_copy for fallible callers.
Update Heap/Scratch, transfer/clone utilities, and MIR passes/benches to use the new traits (notably requiring ResetAllocator where reset() is used).

Technical Notes: Scoped arenas provide a lightweight way to discard temporary allocations without resetting the entire allocator, while keeping existing bulk-reset behavior available via ResetAllocator.

_{🤖 Was this summary useful? React with 👍 or 👎}

augmentcode

Review completed. 2 suggestions posted.

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

libs/@local/hashql/core/src/heap/scratch.rs

libs/@local/hashql/core/src/heap/transfer.rs

codspeed-hq · 2025-12-26T18:49:15Z

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging this PR will not alter performance

_{Comparing bm/be-260-hashql-switch-internal-allocator-implementation-to-scoping (226e70c) with main (bf829ac)}

Summary

✅ 14 untouched benchmarks
🗄️ 15 archived benchmarks run¹

15 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. ↩

Cargo.toml

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.
Jan 16, 12:46 PM UTC: @indietyp added this pull request to the GitHub merge queue with Graphite.

github-actions · 2026-01-16T14:57:59Z

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	$$28.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 194 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.08 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.31 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.89 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1001	$$13.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 80.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.75 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314	$$43.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 296 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.693 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$14.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 84.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.80 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1526	$$24.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 124 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.307 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078	$$28.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 184 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-35.079 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.72 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-82.434 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033	$$14.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 97.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-49.817 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102	$$3.71 \mathrm{ms} \pm 26.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.70 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.89 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.89 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 51	$$3.23 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.69 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269	$$5.10 \mathrm{ms} \pm 29.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.23 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.53 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.89 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 107	$$4.02 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.05 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133	$$4.37 \mathrm{ms} \pm 26.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.91 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.35 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.22 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63	$$3.99 \mathrm{ms} \pm 27.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.35 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2	$$2.58 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.37 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.49 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.03 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1	$$2.55 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.63 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8	$$2.86 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.05 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.67 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.69 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3	$$2.83 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.87 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52	$$2.99 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.77 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.66 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.69 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 25	$$2.84 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.86 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94	$$3.35 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.79 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.90 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.12 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 26	$$3.12 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.40 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66	$$3.25 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.01 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.88 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.75 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29	$$3.12 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.81 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth	1 entities	$$40.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 169 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.80 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	10 entities	$$79.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 353 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.15 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	25 entities	$$45.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 174 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.53 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	5 entities	$$47.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 225 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.34 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	50 entities	$$55.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 294 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.89 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	1 entities	$$41.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 169 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.998 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	10 entities	$$421 \mathrm{ms} \pm 987 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.91 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	25 entities	$$98.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 426 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.94 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	5 entities	$$86.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 373 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.966 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	50 entities	$$289 \mathrm{ms} \pm 885 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-9.340 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	1 entities	$$15.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 79.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.30 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	10 entities	$$15.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 86.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.44 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	25 entities	$$15.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 83.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.12 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	5 entities	$$15.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 85.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.991 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	50 entities	$$18.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 132 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.00 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$15.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 89.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.62 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$15.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 75.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.83 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	100 entities	$$15.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 83.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.18 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	1000 entities	$$15.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 77.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.406 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10000 entities	$$23.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 140 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.166 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	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`	$$31.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 275 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.41 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1`	$$30.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 277 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.449 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1`	$$31.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 298 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.68 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1`	$$30.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 322 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.411 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2`	$$30.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 252 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.333 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1`	$$31.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 270 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.247 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1`	$$30.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 325 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.308 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1`	$$30.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 260 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.997 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1`	$$30.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 300 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.281 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id	Account ID: `bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba`	$$8.25 \mathrm{ms} \pm 37.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.414 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$48.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 215 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.492 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$98.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 379 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.857 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$54.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 253 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.261 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$62.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 299 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.151 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$71.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 361 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.716 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$77.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 342 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.970 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$52.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 336 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.894 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$80.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 291 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.537 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$58.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 335 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.263 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$66.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 329 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.471 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$69.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 355 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.830 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$69.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 281 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.602 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
full_test	query-limited	$$141 \mathrm{ms} \pm 536 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.077 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
full_test	query-unlimited	$$137 \mathrm{ms} \pm 509 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.683 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-limited	$$40.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 215 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-53.692 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-unlimited	$$577 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.13 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}-0.186 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

indietyp added 3 commits December 26, 2025 18:08

feat: add infallible allocate method

8c89148

feat: unify transfer functions

2824586

feat: ResetAllocator

eda0080

graphite-app bot assigned indietyp Dec 26, 2025

github-actions bot added area/deps Relates to third-party dependencies (area) area/libs Relates to first-party libraries/crates/packages (area) type/eng > backend Owned by the @backend team labels Dec 26, 2025

indietyp changed the title ~~BE-260: Use scoped bump allocator~~ BE-260: HashQL: Switch to bump allocator with scoping support Dec 26, 2025

vercel bot deployed to Preview – petrinaut December 26, 2025 18:46 View deployment

augmentcode bot reviewed Dec 26, 2025

View reviewed changes

libs/@local/hashql/core/src/heap/scratch.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

libs/@local/hashql/core/src/heap/transfer.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

indietyp added 2 commits December 26, 2025 19:51

chore: reduce nightly dependence

06eb73b

chore: comment

7cc80a7

vercel bot temporarily deployed to Preview – petrinaut December 26, 2025 18:53 Inactive

graphite-app bot reviewed Dec 26, 2025

View reviewed changes

Cargo.toml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

vercel bot deployed to Preview – hash December 26, 2025 19:05 View deployment

chore: remove bumpalo

e9b76a7

vercel bot deployed to Preview – hashdotdesign December 26, 2025 19:36 View deployment

vercel bot deployed to Preview – petrinaut December 26, 2025 19:38 View deployment

vercel bot deployed to Preview – hash December 26, 2025 19:45 View deployment

indietyp force-pushed the bm/be-260-hashql-switch-internal-allocator-implementation-to-scoping branch from ebfd8b7 to e16e6da Compare January 15, 2026 15:22

indietyp force-pushed the bm/be-259-hashql-write-type-system-benchmarks branch from 2181e2e to 7d8d5dd Compare January 15, 2026 15:22

vercel bot deployed to Preview – petrinaut January 15, 2026 15:27 View deployment

vercel bot deployed to Preview – hash January 15, 2026 15:34 View deployment

indietyp force-pushed the bm/be-260-hashql-switch-internal-allocator-implementation-to-scoping branch from e16e6da to 82890e0 Compare January 16, 2026 10:38

indietyp force-pushed the bm/be-259-hashql-write-type-system-benchmarks branch from 7d8d5dd to 743bec5 Compare January 16, 2026 10:38

vercel bot deployed to Preview – petrinaut January 16, 2026 10:44 View deployment

vercel bot deployed to Preview – hash January 16, 2026 10:49 View deployment

TimDiekmann approved these changes Jan 16, 2026

View reviewed changes

indietyp changed the base branch from bm/be-259-hashql-write-type-system-benchmarks to graphite-base/8218 January 16, 2026 12:45

indietyp changed the base branch from graphite-base/8218 to main January 16, 2026 12:46

indietyp added this pull request to the merge queue Jan 16, 2026

github-merge-queue bot removed this pull request from the merge queue due to a conflict with the base branch Jan 16, 2026

indietyp force-pushed the bm/be-260-hashql-switch-internal-allocator-implementation-to-scoping branch from 82890e0 to 226e70c Compare January 16, 2026 13:46

vercel bot deployed to Preview – petrinaut January 16, 2026 13:50 View deployment

vercel bot deployed to Preview – hash January 16, 2026 13:54 View deployment

indietyp added this pull request to the merge queue Jan 16, 2026

Merged via the queue into main with commit 9355427 Jan 16, 2026
172 checks passed

indietyp deleted the bm/be-260-hashql-switch-internal-allocator-implementation-to-scoping branch January 16, 2026 14:20

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 26, 2025

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

🔍 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 26, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

PR Summary

Uh oh!

indietyp commented Dec 26, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Dec 26, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

augmentcode bot commented Dec 26, 2025

Uh oh!

augmentcode bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

codspeed-hq bot commented Dec 26, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging this PR will not alter performance

Summary

Footnotes

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

indietyp commented Jan 16, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Merge activity

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Jan 16, 2026

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!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

cursor bot commented Dec 26, 2025 •

edited

Loading

indietyp commented Dec 26, 2025 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Dec 26, 2025 •

edited

Loading

codspeed-hq bot commented Dec 26, 2025 •

edited

Loading

indietyp commented Jan 16, 2026 •

edited

Loading