Update Rust toolchains to nightly-2026-02-02

[hash-worker]

This PR contains the following updates:

Package	Update	Change
rust	minor	2026-01-19 -> 2026-02-02

---

Warning

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

---

Configuration

📅 Schedule: Branch creation - "before 11am" (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.

[vercel]

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

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
hash	Ready	Preview, Comment	Feb 6, 2026 11:33am
petrinaut	Ready	Preview	Feb 6, 2026 11:33am

2 Skipped Deployments

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
hashdotdesign	Ignored	Preview	Feb 6, 2026 11:33am
hashdotdesign-tokens	Ignored	Preview	Feb 6, 2026 11:33am

[cursor]

PR Summary

Medium Risk
Mostly a toolchain bump plus mechanical refactors, but it changes compiler version/feature usage and toggles a dependency feature (roaring simd) which can affect build behavior and performance.

Overview
Updates the pinned Rust toolchain to nightly-2026-02-02 and refreshes error-stack’s documented rust-version badge to match.

Applies minor compatibility cleanups across the workspace: switches assert_matches/debug_assert_matches imports to the new core::assert_matches module style, simplifies Postgres test/bench env-port parsing, adjusts a HARPC session sweep default to Duration::from_mins(1), drops the push_mut nightly feature from hashql-eval, and disables roaring’s simd feature in hashql-core.

^{Written by Cursor Bugbot for commit 5d56712. This will update automatically on new commits. Configure here.}

[augmentcode]

🤖 Augment PR Summary

Summary: Updates the repo Rust toolchain pin to nightly-2026-02-02.
Changes: Refreshes the rust-version badges in error-stack docs to match the new nightly date.

_{🤖 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.

[indietyp]

• Update Rust toolchains to nightly-2026-02-02 #8350 👈 (View in Graphite)
• main

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

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 60.10%. Comparing base (1492bce) to head (5d56712).
⚠️ Report is 7 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #8350      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   60.10%   60.10%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files        1235     1234       -1     
  Lines      118201   118219      +18     
  Branches     5180     5184       +4     
==========================================
  Hits        71050    71050              
- Misses      46324    46342      +18     
  Partials      827      827              

Flag	Coverage Δ
apps.hash-ai-worker-ts	1.41% <ø> (-0.01%)	⬇️
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> (ø)
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	87.91% <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.

[codspeed-hq]

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging this PR will not alter performance

_{Comparing deps/rs/rust-toolchains (5d56712) with main (6fa6625)}

Summary

✅ 21 untouched benchmarks
🗄️ 12 archived benchmarks run¹

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. ↩

[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.

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/21748742999

[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	$$27.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 185 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-37.856 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.40 \mathrm{ms} \pm 26.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.70 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1001	$$13.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 97.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.31 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314	$$43.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 334 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.69 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$14.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 81.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.397 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1526	$$24.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 145 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.67 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078	$$44.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 241 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-10.845 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$20.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 115 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.396 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033	$$32.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 188 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.039 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102	$$3.66 \mathrm{ms} \pm 24.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.38 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.81 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.837 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 51	$$3.22 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.530 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269	$$5.09 \mathrm{ms} \pm 32.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.36 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.37 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.835 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 107	$$4.01 \mathrm{ms} \pm 25.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.81 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133	$$4.20 \mathrm{ms} \pm 34.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.38 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.27 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.04 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63	$$3.99 \mathrm{ms} \pm 32.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.93 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2	$$2.41 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.77 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.35 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.29 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1	$$2.45 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.08 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8	$$2.65 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.80 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.55 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.54 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3	$$2.74 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.85 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52	$$2.83 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.57 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.45 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.17 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 25	$$2.61 \mathrm{ms} \pm 9.70 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.882 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94	$$3.16 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.35 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.70 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.49 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 26	$$2.91 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.12 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66	$$3.04 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.37 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.66 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.52 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29	$$2.89 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.959 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth	1 entities	$$40.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 208 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.284 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	10 entities	$$76.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 344 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.248 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	25 entities	$$44.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 185 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.521 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	5 entities	$$46.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 209 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.664 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	50 entities	$$54.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 276 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.773 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	1 entities	$$40.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 148 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.318 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	10 entities	$$418 \mathrm{ms} \pm 782 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.194 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	25 entities	$$96.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 441 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.918 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	5 entities	$$85.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 296 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.161 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	50 entities	$$280 \mathrm{ms} \pm 663 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.677 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	1 entities	$$14.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 68.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.641 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	10 entities	$$15.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 71.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.542 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	25 entities	$$15.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 77.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.810 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	5 entities	$$14.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 67.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.756 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	50 entities	$$17.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 106 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.024 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$14.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 63.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.947 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$14.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 79.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.767 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	100 entities	$$14.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 65.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.968 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	1000 entities	$$15.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 71.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.522 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10000 entities	$$22.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 135 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.375 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	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	$$30.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 245 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.815 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1	$$30.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 258 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.58 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1	$$28.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 280 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.729 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1	$$30.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 301 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.98 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2	$$30.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 317 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.017 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1	$$29.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 269 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.258 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1	$$29.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 306 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.887 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1	$$29.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 279 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-7.366 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1	$$30.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 272 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.202 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id	Account ID: bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba	$$7.99 \mathrm{ms} \pm 35.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.929 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$46.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 264 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-50.550 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$95.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 380 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-33.659 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$52.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 238 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-47.467 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$60.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 327 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-45.218 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$68.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 304 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-41.713 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$76.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 357 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-39.257 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$50.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 282 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-42.285 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$77.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 440 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-32.843 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$58.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 446 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-38.857 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$66.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 416 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-36.753 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$69.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 348 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-35.047 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$66.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 401 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-37.022 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
full_test	query-limited	$$141 \mathrm{ms} \pm 528 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.61 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
full_test	query-unlimited	$$142 \mathrm{ms} \pm 540 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.21 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-limited	$$107 \mathrm{ms} \pm 618 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}33.3 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-unlimited	$$581 \mathrm{ms} \pm 3.11 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}1.55 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph