Update Rust toolchains to nightly-2026-08-17

[hash-dependencies]

This PR contains the following updates:

Package	Update	Change	Pending
rust	patch	2026-08-03 → 2026-08-17	2026-08-31 (+1)

---

Configuration

📅 Schedule: (UTC)

• Branch creation
  • "before 11am"
• 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 Mend Renovate.

[vercel]

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

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
hash	Ready	Preview	Aug 31, 2026 6:56am
hashdotdesign-tokens	Ready	Preview	Aug 31, 2026 6:56am
petrinaut	Ready	Preview	Aug 31, 2026 6:56am
petrinaut-docs	Ready	Preview	Aug 31, 2026 6:56am

[cursor]

PR Summary

Low Risk
Toolchain and badge-only changes with no application logic; main risk is CI or compile breakage from the newer nightly compiler.

Overview
Bumps the repo’s pinned Rust nightly from nightly-2026-08-03 to nightly-2026-08-17 in rust-toolchain.toml and the matching mise lock entry for tools.rust.

Documentation badges in error-stack (README.md, macros/README.md, and the crate doc comment in lib.rs) are updated so the displayed Rust version matches the new nightly pin.

^{Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 43efd5d. Bugbot is set up for automated code reviews on this repo. Configure here.}

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 60.99%. Comparing base (390d7ee) to head (43efd5d).
⚠️ Report is 4 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #9291      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   60.66%   60.99%   +0.33%     
==========================================
  Files        1439     1448       +9     
  Lines      143119   144669    +1550     
  Branches     6654     6703      +49     
==========================================
+ Hits        86817    88235    +1418     
- Misses      55211    55324     +113     
- Partials     1091     1110      +19     

Flag	Coverage Δ
apps.hash-ai-worker-ts	1.99% <ø> (ø)
apps.hash-api	14.68% <ø> (ø)
blockprotocol.type-system	40.84% <ø> (ø)
local.claude-hooks	0.00% <ø> (ø)
local.harpc-client	51.49% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-backend-utils	3.27% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-graph-sdk	10.02% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-isomorphic-utils	12.22% <ø> (ø)
rust.antsi	2.36% <ø> (ø)
rust.error-stack	90.81% <ø> (ø)
rust.harpc-codec	84.70% <ø> (ø)
rust.harpc-net	96.21% <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-config	100.00% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-authentication	97.00% <ø> (+0.97%)	⬆️
rust.hash-graph-authorization	63.14% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-embeddings	91.88% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-postgres-store	32.02% <ø> (+0.30%)	⬆️
rust.hash-graph-store	48.41% <ø> (-0.09%)	⬇️
rust.hash-graph-temporal-versioning	50.18% <ø> (+2.22%)	⬆️
rust.hash-graph-types	0.00% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-validation	84.71% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-middleware	92.19% <ø> (∅)
rust.hashql-core	78.95% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-diagnostics	72.51% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-syntax-jexpr	94.04% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 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 degrade performance by 25.56%

⚠️ Different runtime environments detected

Some benchmarks with significant performance changes were compared across different runtime environments,
which may affect the accuracy of the results.

Open the report in CodSpeed to investigate

⚡ 1 improved benchmark
❌ 5 regressed benchmarks
✅ 68 untouched benchmarks
⏩ 24 skipped benchmarks¹

Warning

Please fix the performance issues or acknowledge them on CodSpeed.

Performance Changes

	Benchmark	BASE	HEAD	Efficiency
❌	runtime	29.7 ns	58.9 ns	-49.53%
❌	constant	29.7 ns	58.9 ns	-49.53%
❌	bit_matrix/dense/iter_row[64]	140.8 ns	199.2 ns	-29.29%
❌	bit_matrix/dense/iter_row[200]	185.8 ns	244.2 ns	-23.89%
❌	bit_matrix/dense/iter_row[1000]	496.4 ns	554.7 ns	-10.52%
👁	pattern_match_constant	209.2 ns	150.8 ns	+38.67%

Tip

Investigate this regression by commenting @codspeedbot fix this regression on this PR, or directly use the CodSpeed MCP with your agent.

---

_{Comparing deps/rs/rust-toolchains (43efd5d) with main (73cbb0b)²}

Footnotes

1. 24 benchmarks were skipped, so the baseline results were used instead. If they were deleted from the codebase, click here and archive them to remove them from the performance reports. ↩

2. No successful run was found on main (811c9d9) during the generation of this report, so 73cbb0b was used instead as the comparison base. There might be some changes unrelated to this pull request in this report. ↩

[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	$$26.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 214 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.703 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.36 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.408 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1002	$$12.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 125 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-7.031 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314	$$43.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 369 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.086 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$14.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 117 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-8.303 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1527	$$24.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 233 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.478 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078	$$26.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 221 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.263 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.76 \mathrm{ms} \pm 23.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.448 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033	$$13.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 121 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.679 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102	$$3.76 \mathrm{ms} \pm 29.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.601 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.01 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.570 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 52	$$3.33 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.650 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269	$$5.18 \mathrm{ms} \pm 31.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.203 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.61 \mathrm{ms} \pm 28.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.496 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 108	$$4.11 \mathrm{ms} \pm 26.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.731 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133	$$4.44 \mathrm{ms} \pm 42.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.58 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.50 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.403 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63	$$4.21 \mathrm{ms} \pm 38.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.760 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2	$$2.76 \mathrm{ms} \pm 27.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.80 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.58 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.55 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 2	$$2.69 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.708 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8	$$3.01 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.054 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.80 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.301 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3	$$2.97 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.217 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52	$$3.04 \mathrm{ms} \pm 25.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.674 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.76 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.532 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 26	$$3.01 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.946 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94	$$3.37 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.875 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.00 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.524 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 27	$$3.28 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.406 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66	$$3.36 \mathrm{ms} \pm 22.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.607 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.01 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.730 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29	$$3.33 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.019 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth	1 entities	$$43.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 332 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.665 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	10 entities	$$34.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 225 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.161 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	25 entities	$$37.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 224 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.047 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	5 entities	$$33.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 178 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.832 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	50 entities	$$43.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 271 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.516 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	1 entities	$$49.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 254 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.930 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	10 entities	$$41.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 235 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.517 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	25 entities	$$93.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 617 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.281 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	5 entities	$$54.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 4.57 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{red}53.3 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	50 entities	$$280 \mathrm{ms} \pm 879 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.812 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	1 entities	$$11.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 82.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.462 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	10 entities	$$11.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 68.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.594 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	25 entities	$$11.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 74.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.96 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	5 entities	$$11.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 88.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.53 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	50 entities	$$11.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 60.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.635 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$11.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 62.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.289 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$11.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 114 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.68 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	100 entities	$$11.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 78.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.309 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	1000 entities	$$11.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 87.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.298 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10000 entities	$$12.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 69.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.77 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	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	$$12.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 77.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.92 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1	$$12.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 74.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.20 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1	$$12.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 98.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.00 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1	$$12.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 75.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.02 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2	$$12.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 114 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.06 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1	$$11.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 67.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.197 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1	$$12.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 105 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.29 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1	$$11.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 103 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.138 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1	$$12.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 83.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.01 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id	Account ID: bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba	$$8.70 \mathrm{ms} \pm 57.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.02 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$60.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 396 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.199 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$113 \mathrm{ms} \pm 505 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.823 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$68.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 400 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.384 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$78.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 363 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.119 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$86.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 595 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.667 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$92.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 647 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.854 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$45.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 284 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.403 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$74.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 365 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.322 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$52.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 336 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.380 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$62.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 447 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.563 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$64.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 359 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.083 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$64.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 515 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.494 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
full_test	query-limited	$$115 \mathrm{ms} \pm 668 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-8.993 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
full_test	query-unlimited	$$127 \mathrm{ms} \pm 720 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-8.258 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-limited	$$19.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 134 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-22.183 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-unlimited	$$556 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.03 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}-1.867 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph