Skip to content

Update eslint npm packages (major) #8128

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Open
hash-worker wants to merge 6 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Update eslint npm packages (major) #8128

hash-worker wants to merge 6 commits into from
+325 −494

Conversation

@hash-worker
Copy link
Contributor

@hash-worker hash-worker bot commented Nov 30, 2025 •
edited
Loading

This PR contains the following updates:

Package Change Age Confidence
eslint-config-sheriff (source) 29.0.0 -> 31.1.0 age confidence
eslint-plugin-storybook (source) 9.1.13 -> 10.1.9 age confidence

Warning

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

Release Notes

AndreaPontrandolfo/sheriff (eslint-config-sheriff)

v31.1.0

Compare Source

Minor Changes
  • 9ff5542: feat: Replace typescript-eslint config() with ESLint built-in defineConfig()
    Closes #​418

v31.0.0

Compare Source

Major Changes
  • 8554daa: feat: fixed release flow

v29.1.0

Compare Source

Minor Changes
Patch Changes
  • 5537e88: fix(config): add support for typed rules in Astro and fix naming convention rule for Astro endpoints
storybookjs/storybook (eslint-plugin-storybook)

v10.1.9

Compare Source

v10.1.8

Compare Source

v10.1.7

Compare Source

v10.1.6

Compare Source

v10.1.5

Compare Source

v10.1.4

Compare Source

v10.1.3

Compare Source

v10.1.2

Compare Source

  • Checklist: Fix how state changes are reported and drop some completion restrictions - #​33217, thanks @​ghengeveld!

v10.1.1

Compare Source

v10.1.0

Compare Source

Easier to setup, more accessible to use

Storybook 10.1 focuses on two key improvements: installation and accessibility:

  • ♿ UI overhaul to fix hundreds of a11y issues
  • 🧑‍💻 CLI overhaul for faster, more reliable install
  • ✅ Checklist-based onboarding guide for new users

The release also contains compatibility fixes for:

  • 🅰️ Angular 21 support
  • 🦀 RSbuild install support in CLI
  • ⚡️ Preact support for Vitest addon

Finally, it contains two highly-requested experimental features:

  • 📋 Component manifest for Storybook MCP
  • ⚛️ Improved JSX code snippets for React
List of all updates

v10.0.8

Compare Source

v10.0.7

Compare Source

v10.0.6

Compare Source

v10.0.5

Compare Source

v10.0.4

Compare Source

v10.0.3

Compare Source

v10.0.2

Compare Source

v10.0.1

Compare Source

v10.0.0

Compare Source

Storybook 10 contains one breaking change: it’s ESM-only. This simplifies our distribution and reduces install size by 29% while simultaneously unminifying dist code for easier debugging.
It also includes features to level up your UI development, documentation, and testing workflows:

  • 🧩 Module automocking for easier testing
  • 🏭 Typesafe CSF factories Preview for React
  • 💫 UI editing and sharing optimizations
  • 🏷️ Tag filtering exclusion and configuration for sidebar management
  • 🔀 Next 16, Vitest 4, Svelte async components, and more!
List of all updates

v9.1.17

Compare Source

v9.1.16

Compare Source

v9.1.15

Compare Source

v9.1.14

Compare Source

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.

👻 Immortal: This PR will be recreated if closed unmerged. Get config help if that's undesired.

  • 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 13:22
@github-actions github-actions bot added area/deps Relates to third-party dependencies (area) area/libs Relates to first-party libraries/crates/packages (area) type/eng > frontend Owned by the @frontend team type/eng > backend Owned by the @backend team area/apps > hash.design Affects the `hash.design` design site (app) labels Nov 30, 2025
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 30, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 58.90%. Comparing base (06cc531) to head (86f0e38).

Additional details and impacted files 
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #8128   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   58.90%   58.90%           
=======================================
  Files        1193     1193           
  Lines      112723   112723           
  Branches     5013     5013           
=======================================
+ Hits        66394    66395    +1     
+ Misses      45571    45570    -1     
  Partials      758      758
Flag Coverage Δ
apps.hash-ai-worker-ts 1.32% <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% <100.00%> (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 96.18% <ø> (+0.01%) ⬆️
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 82.36% <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 88.18% <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.

@hash-worker hash-worker bot force-pushed the deps/js/major-eslint-npm-packages branch from 3e66cbf to e4f15f4 Compare December 1, 2025 15:12
@hash-worker hash-worker bot force-pushed the deps/js/major-eslint-npm-packages branch from e4f15f4 to 3d530e2 Compare December 1, 2025 18:16
@hash-worker hash-worker bot force-pushed the deps/js/major-eslint-npm-packages branch from 3d530e2 to 0e2a5a4 Compare December 3, 2025 21:39
@vilkinsons vilkinsons requested a review from indietyp December 4, 2025 07:17
@hash-worker hash-worker bot force-pushed the deps/js/major-eslint-npm-packages branch from 0e2a5a4 to ea18199 Compare December 5, 2025 10:47
@hash-worker hash-worker bot force-pushed the deps/js/major-eslint-npm-packages branch from ea18199 to 64c2f6e Compare December 6, 2025 08:18
@hash-worker hash-worker bot force-pushed the deps/js/major-eslint-npm-packages branch from b4fac6c to 2bcac22 Compare December 18, 2025 11:45
@github-actions github-actions bot added area/apps > hash* Affects HASH (a `hash-*` app) area/apps > hash-api Affects the HASH API (app) area/tests New or updated tests area/tests > integration New or updated integration tests area/tests > playwright New or updated Playwright tests area/apps labels Dec 20, 2025
@indietyp Graphite App
Copy link
Member

indietyp commented Dec 20, 2025

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

@indietyp indietyp force-pushed the deps/js/major-eslint-npm-packages branch from bb1c35e to 3fe11ff Compare December 20, 2025 14:24
@hash-worker
Copy link
Contributor Author

hash-worker bot commented Dec 20, 2025

Edited/Blocked Notification

Renovate will not automatically rebase this PR, because it does not recognize the last commit author and assumes somebody else may have edited the PR.

You can manually request rebase by checking the rebase/retry box above.

⚠️ Warning: custom changes will be lost.

@graphite-app graphite-app bot requested review from a team December 20, 2025 15:23
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Dec 20, 2025

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 $$24.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 91.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-33.271 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.66 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.915 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1001 $$12.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 79.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.37 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314 $$37.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 273 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.022 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$11.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 72.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.166 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1526 $$20.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 139 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.692 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078 $$25.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 124 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-39.223 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$3.00 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-84.336 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033 $$12.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 50.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-52.042 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102 $$2.99 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.516 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.26 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.971 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 51 $$2.58 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.752 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269 $$4.25 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.604 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.76 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.441 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 107 $$3.27 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.216 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133 $$3.50 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.612 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.65 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.461 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63 $$3.15 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.228 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2 $$2.05 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.23 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$1.99 \mathrm{ms} \pm 5.93 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.86 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1 $$2.08 \mathrm{ms} \pm 8.85 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.09 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8 $$2.21 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.14 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.13 \mathrm{ms} \pm 9.98 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.10 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3 $$2.32 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.61 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52 $$2.36 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.89 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.08 \mathrm{ms} \pm 7.44 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.51 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 25 $$2.22 \mathrm{ms} \pm 9.46 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.03 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94 $$2.63 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.73 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.28 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.13 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 26 $$2.45 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.08 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66 $$2.54 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.92 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.27 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.93 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29 $$2.43 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.05 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth 1 entities $$32.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 139 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.565 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth 10 entities $$72.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 339 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.51 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth 25 entities $$36.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 143 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.279 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth 5 entities $$40.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 152 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.581 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth 50 entities $$46.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 267 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.46 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth 1 entities $$35.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 173 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.583 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth 10 entities $$423 \mathrm{ms} \pm 745 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.396 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth 25 entities $$82.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 343 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.33 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth 5 entities $$85.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 390 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.47 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth 50 entities $$248 \mathrm{ms} \pm 566 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.090 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth 1 entities $$12.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 51.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.71 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth 10 entities $$12.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 62.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.91 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth 25 entities $$12.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 60.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.04 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth 5 entities $$12.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 56.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.298 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth 50 entities $$15.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 70.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.50 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
entity_by_id 1 entities $$12.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 45.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.868 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id 10 entities $$12.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 66.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.62 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id 100 entities $$12.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 57.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.25 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id 1000 entities $$13.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 73.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.29 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id 10000 entities $$20.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 161 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.525 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ 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 $$28.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 258 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.34 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1 $$27.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 342 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.86 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1 $$25.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 278 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-7.697 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1 $$27.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 237 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.51 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2 $$26.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 323 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.877 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1 $$27.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 258 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.17 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1 $$26.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 298 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.074 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1 $$25.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 267 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.651 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1 $$27.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 249 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.746 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id Account ID: bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba $$6.47 \mathrm{ms} \pm 32.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.894 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
entity_by_property traversal_paths=0 0 $$42.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 276 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.133 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property traversal_paths=255 1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true $$82.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 402 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.305 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false $$47.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 215 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.171 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true $$54.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 286 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.220 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true $$61.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 261 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.241 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true $$66.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 292 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.076 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property traversal_paths=0 0 $$45.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 140 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.782 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property traversal_paths=255 1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true $$68.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 367 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.316 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false $$51.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 205 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.340 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true $$57.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 259 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.148 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true $$59.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 280 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.530 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true $$59.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 303 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.353 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
full_test query-limited $$125 \mathrm{ms} \pm 528 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.402 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
full_test query-unlimited $$125 \mathrm{ms} \pm 489 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.61 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
linked_queries query-limited $$35.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 112 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-60.045 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
linked_queries query-unlimited $$523 \mathrm{ms} \pm 816 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.636 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

This was referenced Dec 22, 2025
Closed
Closed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@cursor cursor[bot] cursor[bot] left review comments

@indietyp indietyp Awaiting requested review from indietyp

At least 1 approving review is required to merge this pull request.

Assignees

@indietyp indietyp

@CiaranMn CiaranMn

Labels

area/apps > hash.design Affects the `hash.design` design site (app) 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 > playwright New or updated Playwright tests area/tests New or updated tests type/eng > backend Owned by the @backend team type/eng > frontend Owned by the @frontend team

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@indietyp @CiaranMn