Update tool `cargo:cargo-llvm-cov` to 0.8.0 by hash-worker[bot] · Pull Request #8701 · hashintel/hash

hash-worker · 2026-05-06T01:01:28Z

This PR contains the following updates:

Package	Update	Change	Pending
cargo:cargo-llvm-cov	minor	`0.6.18` → `0.8.0`	`0.8.7` (+1)

Warning

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

Release Notes

taiki-e/cargo-llvm-cov (cargo:cargo-llvm-cov)

`v0.8.5`

Compare Source

Publish artifact attestations.

`v0.8.4`

Compare Source

Update minimal version of cargo-config2 to 0.1.40 to fix error with custom targets in recent nightly.

`v0.8.3`

Compare Source

cargo llvm-cov show-env improvements:
- Add --csh for csh and tcsh.
- Add --nu for nushell.
- Add --xonsh for xonsh.
Diagnostics improvements.

`v0.8.2`

Compare Source

Support ui_test. (#477)

`v0.8.1`

Compare Source

Back "cargo-llvm-cov subcommands other than report and clean may not work correctly ..." error to warning.

This was changed from a warning to an error in 0.7.0, but it has been reverted because a case where it previously worked without issues was reported.

`v0.8.0`

Compare Source

Support glob pattern, versioned name with partial version or <name>@<version> syntax, and package spec in --package. Previously, only package name and versioned package name with <name>:<full_version> are supported. (#476)

This also fixes regression introduced in 0.7.0 where causing packages specified with --package are wrongly excluded from report/test when package is specified with the above syntaxes.
Support glob pattern, versioned name, and package spec in --exclude. When we tested it previously, Cargo did not support this, but the current version of Cargo does support it. (#476)
Align the exclusion behavior in reports when cargo-llvm-cov is performed in a sub-crate directory of a workspace or in the root crate of a non-virtual workspace without using --workspace or --package, to match the behavior when --workspace or --package is used (by default, only show the tested crates). (#476)

Compatibility Note: When --workspace or --package is not used, this will exclude other untested workspace members from the report that were previously implicitly included.

If you want to test other workspace members, consider using --workspace or --package. If you don't want to test other workspace members but still want to include them in the report, consider using --workspace or --exclude-from-test.

`v0.7.1`

Compare Source

Fix regression introduced in 0.7.0 where causing coverage test failure in nextest's CI. (6e30e6f)

`v0.7.0`

Compare Source

Fix regression introduced in 0.7.0 where causing coverage test failure in nextest's CI. (6e30e6f)

`v0.6.24`

Compare Source

Support *-windows-gnullvm targets. (#470, thanks @mati865)
Fix a bug causing --profraw-only to remove too many files. (#469, thanks @smoelius)
Distribute prebuilt binary for AArch64 Windows.
-C instrument-coverage doesn't support aarch64-pc-windows-msvc yet (rust-lang/rust#150123), but cross-compile to aarch64-pc-windows-gnullvm works.

`v0.6.23`

Compare Source

Enable release immutability.

`v0.6.22`

Compare Source

Update documentation to mention the way to get coverage for wasm32-unknown-unknown target.
Exclude files named tests.rs/*_tests.rs/*-tests.rs from the report by default.

`v0.6.21`

Compare Source

Update minimal version of cargo-config2 to 0.1.39 to fix regression causing "invalid type: .., expected struct TargetConfig" error when a custom field used in target.<triple> config. (#454)

`v0.6.20`

Compare Source

Support Cargo build-dir that added in Cargo 1.91. (#452)
Update minimal version of cargo-config2 to 0.1.38 to improve support for target names that contain ".". (#446)

`v0.6.19`

Compare Source

Distribute prebuilt binaries for powerpc64le/riscv64gc/s390x Linux.

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 · 2026-05-06T01:01:33Z

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

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
hash	Ready	Preview, Comment	May 22, 2026 3:53pm
hashdotdesign-tokens	Ready	Preview, Comment	May 22, 2026 3:53pm
petrinaut	Ready	Preview, Comment	May 22, 2026 3:53pm

cursor · 2026-05-06T01:01:34Z

PR Summary

Low Risk
Low risk: this only updates the pinned cargo:cargo-llvm-cov developer tool version in mise config, with impact limited to coverage tooling behavior in CI/local dev.

Overview
Updates the mise toolchain pin for cargo:cargo-llvm-cov from 0.6.18 to 0.8.0 in .config/mise/config.toml, refreshing the Rust coverage CLI used in developer and CI workflows.

^{Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 210f7bf. Bugbot is set up for automated code reviews on this repo. Configure here.}

augmentcode · 2026-05-06T01:03:58Z

🤖 Augment PR Summary

Summary: Updates the pinned mise tool version for cargo:cargo-llvm-cov from 0.6.18 to 0.8.0.
Why: Keeps Rust coverage tooling current for local development and CI coverage generation.

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

augmentcode

Review completed. 1 suggestion posted.

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

codspeed-hq · 2026-05-06T01:08:11Z

Merging this PR will not alter performance

✅ 80 untouched benchmarks

_{Comparing deps/tool/cargo-cargo-llvm-cov-0.x (210f7bf) with main (0eb9937)}

codecov · 2026-05-06T01:08:36Z

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 58.82%. Comparing base (0eb9937) to head (210f7bf).
⚠️ Report is 6 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #8701      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   62.83%   58.82%   -4.01%     
==========================================
  Files        1368     1328      -40     
  Lines      140845   126882   -13963     
  Branches     5859     5790      -69     
==========================================
- Hits        88502    74642   -13860     
+ Misses      51412    51359      -53     
+ Partials      931      881      -50

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	`96.19% <ø> (ø)`
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	`79.25% <ø> (-2.92%)`	⬇️
rust.hashql-diagnostics	`72.53% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hashql-eval	`77.88% <ø> (-3.21%)`	⬇️
rust.hashql-hir	`89.06% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hashql-mir	`86.76% <ø> (-4.82%)`	⬇️
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.

github-actions · 2026-05-22T16:56:35Z

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	$$25.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 134 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.33 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.42 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.33 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1001	$$12.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 61.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.61 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314	$$42.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 258 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.31 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$14.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 90.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.619 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1526	$$23.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 142 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.900 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078	$$26.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 144 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.101 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.77 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.48 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033	$$13.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 83.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.223 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102	$$3.73 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.073 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.01 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.52 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 51	$$3.34 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.120 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269	$$5.11 \mathrm{ms} \pm 23.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.500 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.59 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.03 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 107	$$4.13 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.505 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133	$$4.39 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.226 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.44 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.106 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63	$$4.14 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.51 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2	$$2.74 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.059 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.69 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.65 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1	$$2.78 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.312 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8	$$3.09 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.90 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.88 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.208 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3	$$3.17 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.519 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52	$$3.07 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.720 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.79 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.078 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 25	$$2.94 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.558 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94	$$3.48 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.14 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.07 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.982 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 26	$$3.28 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.892 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66	$$3.43 \mathrm{ms} \pm 23.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.957 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.04 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.343 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29	$$3.31 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.258 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth	1 entities	$$44.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 203 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.231 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	10 entities	$$80.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 365 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.519 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	25 entities	$$50.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 187 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.01 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	5 entities	$$50.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 238 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.060 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	50 entities	$$62.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 354 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.780 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	1 entities	$$45.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 218 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.004 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	10 entities	$$402 \mathrm{ms} \pm 806 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.949 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	25 entities	$$99.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 527 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.87 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	5 entities	$$83.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 334 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.202 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	50 entities	$$285 \mathrm{ms} \pm 573 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.027 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	1 entities	$$19.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 86.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.049 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	10 entities	$$20.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 109 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.440 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	25 entities	$$19.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 82.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.350 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	5 entities	$$19.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 101 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.329 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	50 entities	$$23.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 162 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.934 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$19.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 80.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.04 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$19.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 76.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.118 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	100 entities	$$19.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 89.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.632 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	1000 entities	$$19.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 94.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.095 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10000 entities	$$25.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 165 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.270 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	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`	$$33.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 235 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.896 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1`	$$34.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 253 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.99 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1`	$$33.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 255 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.630 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1`	$$33.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 286 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.081 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2`	$$33.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 244 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.72 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1`	$$33.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 229 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.404 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1`	$$33.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 267 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.748 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1`	$$33.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 213 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.203 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1`	$$33.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 284 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.261 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id	Account ID: `bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba`	$$8.34 \mathrm{ms} \pm 35.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.266 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$89.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 406 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.036 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$140 \mathrm{ms} \pm 535 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.397 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$96.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 350 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.325 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$105 \mathrm{ms} \pm 517 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.618 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$113 \mathrm{ms} \pm 475 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.088 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$119 \mathrm{ms} \pm 446 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.172 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$98.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 352 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.164 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$126 \mathrm{ms} \pm 393 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.133 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$106 \mathrm{ms} \pm 425 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.193 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$114 \mathrm{ms} \pm 419 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.409 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$116 \mathrm{ms} \pm 441 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.556 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$116 \mathrm{ms} \pm 372 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.416 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
full_test	query-limited	$$143 \mathrm{ms} \pm 375 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.662 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
full_test	query-unlimited	$$155 \mathrm{ms} \pm 475 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.532 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-limited	$$107 \mathrm{ms} \pm 463 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.853 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-unlimited	$$585 \mathrm{ms} \pm 2.56 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}0.218 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

hash-worker Bot enabled auto-merge May 6, 2026 01:01

github-actions Bot added the area/deps Relates to third-party dependencies (area) label May 6, 2026

augmentcode Bot reviewed May 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread .config/mise/config.toml

Update tool cargo:cargo-llvm-cov to 0.8.0

210f7bf

hash-worker Bot force-pushed the deps/tool/cargo-cargo-llvm-cov-0.x branch from 124b76d to 210f7bf Compare May 22, 2026 15:40

vercel Bot deployed to Preview – hashdotdesign-tokens May 22, 2026 15:43 View deployment

vercel Bot deployed to Preview – petrinaut May 22, 2026 15:44 View deployment

vercel Bot deployed to Preview – hash May 22, 2026 15:53 View deployment

hash-worker Bot assigned indietyp and TimDiekmann May 22, 2026

TimDiekmann approved these changes May 23, 2026

View reviewed changes

hash-worker Bot added this pull request to the merge queue May 23, 2026

Merged via the queue into main with commit b9ecc19 May 23, 2026
232 of 234 checks passed

hash-worker Bot deleted the deps/tool/cargo-cargo-llvm-cov-0.x branch May 23, 2026 02:23

Conversation

hash-worker Bot commented May 6, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Release Notes

Configuration

Uh oh!

vercel Bot commented May 6, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

cursor Bot commented May 6, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

PR Summary

Uh oh!

augmentcode Bot commented May 6, 2026

Uh oh!

augmentcode Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

codspeed-hq Bot commented May 6, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Merging this PR will not alter performance

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented May 6, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented May 22, 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!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

hash-worker Bot commented May 6, 2026 •

edited

Loading

vercel Bot commented May 6, 2026 •

edited

Loading

cursor Bot commented May 6, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codspeed-hq Bot commented May 6, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov Bot commented May 6, 2026 •

edited

Loading