Update Rust crate deadpool to 0.13.0

[hash-worker]

This PR contains the following updates:

Package	Type	Update	Change
deadpool	workspace.dependencies	minor	0.12.3 → 0.13.0

---

Warning

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

---

Release Notes

deadpool-rs/deadpool (deadpool)

v0.13.0

Compare Source

v0.12.4

Compare Source

---

Configuration

📅 Schedule: (UTC)

• Branch creation
  • "before 4am every weekday,every weekend"
• Automerge
  • "before 4am every weekday,every weekend"

🚦 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.

[vercel]

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

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
hash	Ready	Preview, Comment	May 23, 2026 12:55am
hashdotdesign-tokens	Ready	Preview, Comment	May 23, 2026 12:55am
petrinaut	Ready	Preview, Comment	May 23, 2026 12:55am

[cursor]

PR Summary

Medium Risk
Updates the async connection-pool dependency used by the Postgres store, which could subtly change pooling/runtime behavior despite being a minor version bump.

Overview
Bumps the workspace deadpool dependency from 0.12.3 to 0.13.0.

Updates Cargo.lock accordingly, introducing deadpool-runtime 0.3.1, keeping deadpool-postgres pinned to deadpool 0.12.3, and switching hash-graph-postgres-store to use deadpool 0.13.0.

^{Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 793a059. Bugbot is set up for automated code reviews on this repo. Configure here.}

[augmentcode]

🤖 Augment PR Summary

Summary: Updates the Rust workspace dependency deadpool from 0.12.3 to 0.13.0.

Changes: Bumps the version in Cargo.toml and refreshes Cargo.lock accordingly.

Why: Routine dependency maintenance via Renovate.

Technical Notes: Since deadpool is pre-1.0, this minor bump may include API/behavior changes and updated runtime/MSRV constraints.

Considerations: Confirm there’s no version skew/type mismatch with crates that also pull in deadpool transitively (e.g. via deadpool-postgres).

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

[augmentcode]

Review completed. 1 suggestion posted.

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

[augmentcode]

Cargo.toml:139 — deadpool-postgres 0.14.1 depends on deadpool ^0.12, so bumping the workspace deadpool to 0.13 can introduce two deadpool versions and lead to type incompatibilities if any crate ends up using both directly. It may be worth double-checking the dependency graph/usages to ensure everything is consistently on the same deadpool API surface.

Severity: medium

_{🤖 Was this useful? React with 👍 or 👎, or 🚀 if it prevented an incident/outage.}

[cursor]

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

^{❌ Bugbot Autofix is OFF. To automatically fix reported issues with cloud agents, enable autofix in the Cursor dashboard.}

^{Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 252d9ba. Configure here.}

[cursor]

Incompatible deadpool versions between direct and transitive dependencies

High Severity

Upgrading deadpool to 0.13.0 while deadpool-postgres (0.14.1) still depends on deadpool ^0.12.0 introduces two incompatible versions of deadpool in the dependency tree. The hash-graph-postgres-store crate declares deadpool as public = true, so downstream consumers see deadpool 0.13.0 types, but deadpool-postgres exposes types (like Pool, PoolConfig, PoolError) based on deadpool 0.12.3. These types are not interchangeable across semver-incompatible 0.x versions in Rust. No version of deadpool-postgres currently supports deadpool 0.13.0.

Additional Locations (2)

• Cargo.lock#L3528-L3530
• Cargo.lock#L2113-L2114

 

^{Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 252d9ba. Configure here.}

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 62.82%. Comparing base (0eb9937) to head (793a059).
⚠️ Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #8700      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   62.83%   62.82%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files        1368     1368              
  Lines      140845   140870      +25     
  Branches     5859     5862       +3     
==========================================
- Hits        88502    88499       -3     
- Misses      51412    51440      +28     
  Partials      931      931              

Flag	Coverage Δ
apps.hash-ai-worker-ts	1.41% <ø> (ø)
apps.hash-api	0.00% <ø> (ø)
blockprotocol.type-system	40.84% <ø> (ø)
local.claude-hooks	0.00% <ø> (ø)
local.harpc-client	51.24% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-backend-utils	2.81% <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> (-0.02%)	⬇️
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	26.81% <ø> (ø)
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-ast	87.23% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-compiletest	29.63% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-core	82.17% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-diagnostics	72.53% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-eval	81.08% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-hir	89.06% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-mir	91.58% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-syntax-jexpr	94.06% <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.

[codspeed-hq]

Merging this PR will not alter performance

✅ 80 untouched benchmarks

---

_{Comparing deps/rs/deadpool-rust-crates (793a059) with main (a2e55d2)}

[hash-worker]

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.

[github-actions]

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	$$26.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 200 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.55 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.45 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.120 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1001	$$13.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 112 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}9.04 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314	$$44.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 320 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.24 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$14.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 91.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.983 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1526	$$24.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 160 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.18 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078	$$26.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 186 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.10 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.78 \mathrm{ms} \pm 25.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.922 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033	$$13.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 93.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.73 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102	$$3.75 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.848 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.03 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.865 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 51	$$3.39 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.681 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269	$$5.21 \mathrm{ms} \pm 24.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.169 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.64 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.421 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 107	$$4.21 \mathrm{ms} \pm 24.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.495 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133	$$4.47 \mathrm{ms} \pm 24.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.546 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.50 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.845 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63	$$4.13 \mathrm{ms} \pm 23.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.12 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2	$$2.81 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.75 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.82 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.72 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1	$$2.89 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.88 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8	$$3.13 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.03 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.94 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.775 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3	$$3.23 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.033 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52	$$3.16 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.05 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.85 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.765 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 25	$$3.03 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.03 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94	$$3.54 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.15 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.30 \mathrm{ms} \pm 26.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.31 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 26	$$3.33 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.474 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66	$$3.49 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.52 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.18 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.23 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29	$$3.39 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.790 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth	1 entities	$$49.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 360 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.54 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	10 entities	$$88.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 431 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.37 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	25 entities	$$55.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 414 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.06 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	5 entities	$$57.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 546 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.50 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	50 entities	$$65.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 382 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.84 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	1 entities	$$54.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 466 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}14.3 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	10 entities	$$430 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.01 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}4.98 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	25 entities	$$108 \mathrm{ms} \pm 619 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.33 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	5 entities	$$88.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 398 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.04 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	50 entities	$$299 \mathrm{ms} \pm 890 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.65 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	1 entities	$$19.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 93.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.553 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	10 entities	$$20.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 97.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.883 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	25 entities	$$20.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 98.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.055 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	5 entities	$$20.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 107 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.078 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	50 entities	$$24.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 110 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.651 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$19.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 90.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.747 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$20.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 106 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.126 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	100 entities	$$20.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 235 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.97 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	1000 entities	$$21.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 117 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.86 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10000 entities	$$26.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 169 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.039 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	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	$$33.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 263 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.088 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1	$$34.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 296 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.62 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1	$$35.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 300 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.708 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1	$$34.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 283 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.882 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2	$$34.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 293 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.289 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1	$$34.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 229 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.973 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1	$$34.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 238 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-7.189 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1	$$34.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 294 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.597 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1	$$34.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 266 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.872 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id	Account ID: bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba	$$8.53 \mathrm{ms} \pm 39.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.974 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$95.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 671 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.001 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$152 \mathrm{ms} \pm 767 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.008 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$99.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 420 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-7.666 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$108 \mathrm{ms} \pm 445 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-7.559 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$117 \mathrm{ms} \pm 432 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.948 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$125 \mathrm{ms} \pm 538 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.283 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$110 \mathrm{ms} \pm 549 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.58 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$129 \mathrm{ms} \pm 583 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.300 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$109 \mathrm{ms} \pm 475 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.216 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$117 \mathrm{ms} \pm 439 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.287 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$121 \mathrm{ms} \pm 624 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.836 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$121 \mathrm{ms} \pm 545 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.054 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
full_test	query-limited	$$148 \mathrm{ms} \pm 529 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.36 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
full_test	query-unlimited	$$153 \mathrm{ms} \pm 405 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.55 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-limited	$$109 \mathrm{ms} \pm 361 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.832 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-unlimited	$$607 \mathrm{ms} \pm 3.41 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}1.84 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph