Skip to content

H-5737, H-5851: Bump transitive Cargo dependencies#8203

Merged
TimDiekmann merged 2 commits intomainfrom
t/h-5851-bump-transitive-cargo-dependencies
Dec 19, 2025
Merged

H-5737, H-5851: Bump transitive Cargo dependencies#8203
TimDiekmann merged 2 commits intomainfrom
t/h-5851-bump-transitive-cargo-dependencies

Conversation

@TimDiekmann
Copy link
Member

@TimDiekmann TimDiekmann commented Dec 19, 2025

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

Update dependencies in Cargo.lock to their latest versions.

cargo update --ignore-rust-version --recursive

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 should cover these dependency updates

❓ How to test this?

  1. Checkout the branch
  2. Run the test suite to ensure all tests pass with the updated dependencies
  3. Verify that the application builds and runs correctly

@github-actions github-actions bot added the area/deps Relates to third-party dependencies (area) label Dec 19, 2025
@TimDiekmann Graphite App
Copy link
Member Author

TimDiekmann commented Dec 19, 2025

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

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 19, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 58.77%. Comparing base (ec0c785) to head (af4a073).
⚠️ Report is 4 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files 
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #8203      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   58.77%   58.77%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files        1189     1189              
  Lines      112425   112425              
  Branches     5010     5010              
==========================================
- Hits        66074    66073       -1     
- Misses      45593    45594       +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% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-graph-sdk 10.88% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-isomorphic-utils 0.00% <ø> (ø)
rust.antsi 0.00% <ø> (ø)
rust.error-stack 90.88% <ø> (ø)
rust.harpc-codec 84.70% <ø> (ø)
rust.harpc-net 96.14% <ø> (-0.02%) ⬇️
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 82.34% <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 87.53% <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.

@TimDiekmann TimDiekmann marked this pull request as ready for review December 19, 2025 15:30
@cursor
Copy link

cursor bot commented Dec 19, 2025 •
edited
Loading

PR Summary

Massively updates transitive Rust dependencies, introduces objc2-related crates and other new deps, removes some legacy build deps, and aligns workspace on derive_more 2.1.0.

  • Dependencies (broad updates):
    • Upgrade major stacks: aws-* SDKs, axum 0.7.9, hyper-util 0.1.19, reqwest 0.12.26, rustls 0.23.35 (+ rustls-pki-types/webpki), tower-http 0.6.8, yamux 0.13.8, quinn (with socket2 0.6.1), toml 0.9.10+spec-1.1.0, serde_with 3.16.1, schemars 1.1.0, ICU crates (icu_*), and many others.
    • Consolidate Windows crates to windows-sys 0.61.2 and windows-link references; bump libc, mio, hostname, console, etc.
  • New crates added:
    • Apple/macOS: objc2 ecosystem (objc2-*, block2, dispatch2) and related integrations.
    • Tooling/runtime: ar_archive_writer, additional object 0.32.2, nix 0.30.1, redox_syscall 0.6.0.
  • Removals/Cleanup:
    • Drop legacy build deps: bindgen, clang-sys, cexpr, plist; remove some pinned windows-link versions.
  • Workspace alignment:
    • Update internal crates to use derive_more 2.1.0 (replacing 2.0.1).

Written by Cursor Bugbot for commit af4a073. This will update automatically on new commits. Configure here.

@graphite-app graphite-app bot requested a review from a team December 19, 2025 15:55
indietyp
indietyp previously approved these changes Dec 19, 2025
View reviewed changes
@graphite-app
Copy link
Contributor

graphite-app bot commented Dec 19, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Merge activity

  • Dec 19, 4:15 PM UTC: This pull request can not be added to the Graphite merge queue. Please try rebasing and resubmitting to merge when ready.
  • Dec 19, 4:15 PM UTC: Graphite disabled "merge when ready" on this PR due to: a merge conflict with the target branch; resolve the conflict and try again..

@TimDiekmann TimDiekmann force-pushed the t/h-5851-bump-transitive-cargo-dependencies branch from e9e7bf8 to af4a073 Compare December 19, 2025 16:34
@github-actions github-actions bot dismissed indietyp’s stale review December 19, 2025 16:34

Your organization requires reapproval when changes are made, so Graphite has dismissed approvals. See the output of git range-diff at https://github.com/hashintel/hash/actions/runs/20376222194

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Dec 19, 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 $$27.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 222 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.588 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$3.28 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.819 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1001 $$12.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 88.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.976 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314 $$43.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 283 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.269 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$14.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 75.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.047 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1526 $$24.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 127 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.464 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078 $$27.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 157 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-36.300 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$3.70 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-82.172 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033 $$14.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 98.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-49.126 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102 $$3.69 \mathrm{ms} \pm 22.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.643 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.90 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.867 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 51 $$3.22 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.314 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269 $$5.05 \mathrm{ms} \pm 26.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.228 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$3.50 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.27 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 107 $$3.96 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.591 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133 $$4.26 \mathrm{ms} \pm 24.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.384 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$3.32 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.102 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63 $$3.89 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.554 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2 $$2.63 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}9.00 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.55 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.65 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1 $$2.66 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}9.04 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8 $$2.85 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.60 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.74 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.58 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3 $$2.95 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.67 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52 $$2.92 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.50 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.66 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.39 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 25 $$2.81 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.70 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94 $$3.26 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.75 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.88 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.25 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 26 $$3.10 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.74 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66 $$3.13 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.89 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.84 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.75 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29 $$3.10 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.03 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth 1 entities $$40.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 187 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.463 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth 10 entities $$75.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 309 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.819 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth 25 entities $$44.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 209 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.230 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth 5 entities $$46.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 184 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.220 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth 50 entities $$55.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 307 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.040 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth 1 entities $$41.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 220 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.852 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth 10 entities $$418 \mathrm{ms} \pm 996 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.809 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth 25 entities $$99.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 505 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.290 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth 5 entities $$85.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 415 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.733 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth 50 entities $$288 \mathrm{ms} \pm 792 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-8.799 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth 1 entities $$15.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 80.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.990 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth 10 entities $$15.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 64.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.65 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth 25 entities $$15.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 78.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.26 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth 5 entities $$15.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 68.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.15 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth 50 entities $$18.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 106 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.00 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
entity_by_id 1 entities $$15.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 55.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.338 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id 10 entities $$15.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 70.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.18 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id 100 entities $$15.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 81.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.59 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id 1000 entities $$15.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 76.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.560 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id 10000 entities $$23.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 207 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.28 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

representative_read_entity

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/block/v/1 $$30.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 256 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.29 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1 $$30.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 258 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.430 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1 $$29.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 292 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.814 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1 $$31.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 323 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.04 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2 $$30.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 308 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.51 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1 $$30.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 255 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.388 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1 $$30.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 304 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.834 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1 $$30.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 287 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.189 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1 $$31.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 332 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.53 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id Account ID: bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba $$8.33 \mathrm{ms} \pm 39.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.239 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
entity_by_property traversal_paths=0 0 $$48.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 245 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.56 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property traversal_paths=255 1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true $$97.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 360 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.140 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false $$54.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 261 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.32 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true $$62.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 433 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.86 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true $$71.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 370 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.90 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true $$76.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 311 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.007 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property traversal_paths=0 0 $$51.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 284 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.697 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property traversal_paths=255 1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true $$79.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 346 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.366 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false $$59.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 334 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.743 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true $$66.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 303 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.087 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true $$68.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 329 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.898 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true $$68.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 297 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.028 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
full_test query-limited $$139 \mathrm{ms} \pm 393 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.31 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
full_test query-unlimited $$138 \mathrm{ms} \pm 433 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.36 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
linked_queries query-limited $$40.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 163 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-61.675 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
linked_queries query-unlimited $$577 \mathrm{ms} \pm 806 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.371 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

@TimDiekmann TimDiekmann added this pull request to the merge queue Dec 19, 2025
Merged via the queue into main with commit 06cc531 Dec 19, 2025
251 of 253 checks passed
@TimDiekmann TimDiekmann deleted the t/h-5851-bump-transitive-cargo-dependencies branch December 19, 2025 23:03
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@indietyp indietyp indietyp approved these changes

Assignees

@TimDiekmann TimDiekmann

Labels

area/deps Relates to third-party dependencies (area)

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants

@TimDiekmann @indietyp