Update Rust crate codspeed-criterion-compat to v4.3.0

[hash-worker]

This PR contains the following updates:

Package	Type	Update	Change
codspeed-criterion-compat (source)	workspace.dependencies	minor	4.1.0 -> 4.3.0

---

Warning

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

---

Release Notes

CodSpeedHQ/codspeed-rust (codspeed-criterion-compat)

v4.3.0

Compare Source

What's Changed

• feat(cargo-codspeed): add internal build mode by @​not-matthias in #​159
• fix: instrument-hooks error in CI by @​not-matthias in #​161

Full Changelog: CodSpeedHQ/codspeed-rust@v4.2.1...v4.3.0

v4.2.1

Compare Source

What's Changed

• fix(core): fix inverted boolean condition in warning message by @​GuillaumeLagrange in #​158

Full Changelog: CodSpeedHQ/codspeed-rust@v4.2.0...v4.2.1

v4.2.0

Compare Source

What's Changed

• feat: rename instrumentation to simulation by @​GuillaumeLagrange in #​150
• feat: add support for analysis mode by @​not-matthias in #​152

Full Changelog: CodSpeedHQ/codspeed-rust@v4.1.0...v4.2.0

---

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.

🔕 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.

[cursor]

PR Summary

Dependency updates only; no source changes.

• Bumps codspeed-criterion-compat, codspeed, and codspeed-criterion-compat-walltime from 4.1.0 to 4.3.0.
• Refreshes Cargo.lock, updating/realigning several transitive crates, notably windows-sys versions (0.52.0/0.61.2) and related deps (colored, errno, is-terminal, nu-ansi-term, quinn-udp, rustix, term, winapi-util, stacker, tempfile).

^{Written by Cursor Bugbot for commit f892a90. This will update automatically on new commits. Configure here.}

[augmentcode]

🤖 Augment PR Summary

Summary: This PR updates the Rust workspace dependency codspeed-criterion-compat from 4.1.0 to 4.3.0.

Changes:

• Bumps the CodSpeed Criterion compatibility crate to the latest minor release
• Refreshes the lockfile to reflect the dependency update

Technical Notes: Pulls in upstream improvements such as an internal build mode, CI-related fixes around instrument hooks, and a small warning-message logic fix.

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

[augmentcode]

Review completed. No suggestions at this time.

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

[codspeed-hq]

Merging this PR will improve performance by 15.36%

⚡ 2 improved benchmarks
✅ 16 untouched benchmarks
🗄️ 12 archived benchmarks run¹

Performance Changes

	Benchmark	BASE	HEAD	Efficiency
⚡	complex	18.3 µs	16.2 µs	+12.94%
⚡	diamond	12.4 µs	10.7 µs	+15.36%

---

_{Comparing deps/rs/codspeed-criterion-compat-4.x-lockfile (f892a90) with main (09733a0)}

Footnotes

1. 12 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. ↩

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 60.19%. Comparing base (09733a0) to head (f892a90).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #8311   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   60.19%   60.19%           
=======================================
  Files        1232     1232           
  Lines      118007   118007           
  Branches     5135     5135           
=======================================
+ Hits        71029    71030    +1     
+ Misses      46152    46151    -1     
  Partials      826      826           

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-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	96.16% <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	2.88% <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	81.77% <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	88.00% <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.

[vercel]

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

Project	Deployment	Review	Updated (UTC)
hashdotdesign	Ready	Preview, Comment	Jan 24, 2026 9:46am
hashdotdesign-tokens	Ready	Preview, Comment	Jan 24, 2026 9:46am

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/21313121429

[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	$$23.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 140 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-36.520 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.61 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.133 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1001	$$10.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 83.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.544 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314	$$35.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 267 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.649 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$10.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 61.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.354 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1526	$$19.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 149 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.750 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078	$$24.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 135 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-38.932 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.93 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-84.152 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033	$$9.92 \mathrm{ms} \pm 53.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-64.510 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102	$$2.99 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.21 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.25 \mathrm{ms} \pm 7.95 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.500 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 51	$$2.57 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.675 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269	$$4.18 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.411 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.73 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.133 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 107	$$3.24 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.05 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133	$$3.46 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.534 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.65 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.437 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63	$$3.12 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.035 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2	$$2.04 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.17 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$1.99 \mathrm{ms} \pm 8.85 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.80 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1	$$2.08 \mathrm{ms} \pm 9.55 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.78 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8	$$2.22 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.27 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.13 \mathrm{ms} \pm 8.35 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.87 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3	$$2.30 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.35 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52	$$2.36 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.05 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.09 \mathrm{ms} \pm 8.91 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.99 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 25	$$2.22 \mathrm{ms} \pm 8.58 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.64 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94	$$2.62 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.44 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.27 \mathrm{ms} \pm 9.49 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.90 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 26	$$2.44 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.36 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66	$$2.62 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}9.22 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.26 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.42 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29	$$2.43 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.22 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth	1 entities	$$32.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 145 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.645 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	10 entities	$$69.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 271 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.321 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	25 entities	$$36.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 177 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.749 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	5 entities	$$39.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 144 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.346 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	50 entities	$$44.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 156 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.434 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	1 entities	$$34.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 128 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.58 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	10 entities	$$413 \mathrm{ms} \pm 751 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.014 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	25 entities	$$81.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 330 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.515 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	5 entities	$$83.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 334 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.693 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	50 entities	$$271 \mathrm{ms} \pm 686 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.08 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	1 entities	$$11.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 60.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.937 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	10 entities	$$12.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 52.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.03 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	25 entities	$$12.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 56.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.17 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	5 entities	$$12.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 54.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.25 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	50 entities	$$14.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 107 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.858 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$12.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 53.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.879 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$12.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 46.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.78 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	100 entities	$$12.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 55.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.86 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	1000 entities	$$12.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 48.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.422 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10000 entities	$$19.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 143 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.409 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	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	$$27.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 301 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.97 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1	$$26.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 289 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.119 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1	$$26.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 304 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.265 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1	$$27.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 246 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.40 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2	$$25.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 230 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.029 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1	$$26.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 309 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.815 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1	$$26.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 277 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.135 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1	$$27.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 319 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.39 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1	$$26.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 266 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.11 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id	Account ID: bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba	$$6.47 \mathrm{ms} \pm 32.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.665 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$40.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 241 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.552 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$82.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 428 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.15 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$46.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 198 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.292 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$52.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 281 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.385 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$59.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 271 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.350 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$64.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 308 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.006 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$44.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 236 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.045 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$66.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 351 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.841 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$50.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 260 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.634 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$57.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 402 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.871 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$58.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 307 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.077 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$58.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 371 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.180 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
full_test	query-limited	$$113 \mathrm{ms} \pm 507 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.840 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
full_test	query-unlimited	$$113 \mathrm{ms} \pm 498 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.439 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-limited	$$34.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 159 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-60.310 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-unlimited	$$527 \mathrm{ms} \pm 884 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.953 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph