BE-259: HashQL: Add benchmarks for type system operations

[indietyp]

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

Add benchmarks for the type system to measure performance of critical operations like subtyping, lattice operations, simplification, and type inference.

🔍 What does this change?

• Adds a new benchmark suite for the type system using codspeed-criterion-compat
• Creates benchmark groups for lattice operations, subtyping, simplification, and inference
• Implements helper functions to properly manage heap allocations during benchmarking
• Adds skeleton types to safely handle environment cleanup
• Makes some previously test-only functions public to support benchmarking

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?

• The benchmarks themselves serve as tests for the type system functionality

❓ How to test this?

1. Run the benchmarks with cargo bench -p hashql-core
2. Verify that all benchmark groups (lattice, subtyping, simplify, inference) execute successfully

[cursor]

PR Summary

Introduces a benchmark suite for HashQL’s type system and small core refactors to support safe, allocation-aware runs.

• Adds benches/type_system.rs using codspeed-criterion-compat with groups: lattice, subtyping, simplify, inference; includes helpers to build/reset Heap per-iteration
• New scripts: build:codspeed, test:codspeed in package.json; adds dev-dep codspeed-criterion-compat and a [[bench]] in Cargo.toml
• Adds skeleton structs (*EnvironmentSkeleton, VariableDependencyCollectorSkeleton) and into_skeleton() to delay significant drops during benchmarking
• Makes Ident::synthetic and Variable::synthetic pub const (previously test-only)
• LatticeEnvironment: adds without_warnings() and gates circular-reference diagnostics during recursion; exposes into_skeleton()
• Replaces RefCell with LocalLock in ProvisionedScope for interior mutability in provisioning logic
• Minor visibility/exports in inference modules to enable benchmarking

^{Written by Cursor Bugbot for commit b00cdae. This will update automatically on new commits. Configure here.}

[indietyp]

Warning

This pull request is not mergeable via GitHub because a downstack PR is open. Once all requirements are satisfied, merge this PR as a stack on Graphite.
Learn more

• BE-260: HashQL: Switch to bump allocator with scoping support #8218
• BE-259: HashQL: Add benchmarks for type system operations #8216 👈 (View in Graphite)
• BE-227: HashQL: Implement call graph analysis for MIR #8214
• BE-258: HashQL: Add Changed enum to track MIR transformation pass modifications #8210
• BE-255: HashQL: Implement Copy Propagation (CP) pass for MIR #8207
• BE-231: Add InstSimplify pass for MIR instruction simplification and constant folding #8206
• BE-254: Add CodSpeed benchmarking for HashQL MIR transformation passes #8204
• main

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

[augmentcode]

🤖 Augment PR Summary

Summary: Adds a dedicated benchmark suite for HashQL’s type system to measure performance of core operations (lattice, subtyping, simplification, inference).

Changes:

• Adds a new hashql-core benchmark target (benches/type_system.rs) using codspeed-criterion-compat, with groups for join/meet, subtyping, simplification, and solver runs.
• Introduces a heap/environment benchmarking harness that resets the arena each iteration (via iter_batched_ref + BatchSize::PerIteration) to avoid UAF while reusing allocations.
• Adds “skeleton” types and into_skeleton() helpers on type environments to delay large drops and keep per-iteration teardown predictable.
• Adds LatticeEnvironment::without_warnings() / warnings_enabled to suppress non-fatal diagnostics during benchmarking.
• Refactors provisional mapping internals from RefCell to LocalLock in context/provision.rs.
• Makes Ident::synthetic and Variable::synthetic public (and #[must_use]) so benches can construct synthetic values.

Technical Notes: The benchmark harness uses a small amount of unsafe (raw heap pointer) but documents the soundness assumptions (single-threaded + per-iteration batching).

_{🤖 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]

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #8216 will not alter performance

_{Comparing bm/be-259-hashql-write-type-system-benchmarks (b00cdae) with bm/be-227-hashql-implement-call-graph (9d0c0ed)}

Summary

✅ 17 untouched
🆕 12 new

Benchmarks breakdown

	Benchmark	BASE	HEAD	Efficiency
🆕	full_solve/contravariant	N/A	36.2 µs	N/A
🆕	join/primitives	N/A	6.7 µs	N/A
🆕	nested_struct	N/A	3.9 µs	N/A
🆕	full_solve/simple	N/A	36.4 µs	N/A
🆕	primitives	N/A	5.9 µs	N/A
🆕	union_with_duplicates	N/A	17.8 µs	N/A
🆕	full_solve/complex	N/A	41.4 µs	N/A
🆕	contravariant_closure	N/A	8 µs	N/A
🆕	join/recursive	N/A	578.3 µs	N/A
🆕	meet/primitives	N/A	6.6 µs	N/A
🆕	anti_symmetry	N/A	45 µs	N/A
🆕	meet/recursive	N/A	320.7 µs	N/A

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 43.24324% with 42 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 59.23%. Comparing base (9d0c0ed) to head (b00cdae).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...@local/hashql/core/src/type/environment/lattice.rs	31.57%	11 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
...local/hashql/core/src/type/environment/analysis.rs	0.00%	9 Missing ⚠️
...s/@local/hashql/core/src/type/environment/infer.rs	0.00%	8 Missing ⚠️
...local/hashql/core/src/type/environment/simplify.rs	0.00%	6 Missing ⚠️
...ibs/@local/hashql/core/src/type/inference/visit.rs	0.00%	6 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@                            Coverage Diff                            @@
##           bm/be-227-hashql-implement-call-graph    #8216      +/-   ##
=========================================================================
- Coverage                                  59.25%   59.23%   -0.03%     
=========================================================================
  Files                                       1201     1201              
  Lines                                     114033   114088      +55     
  Branches                                    5060     5062       +2     
=========================================================================
+ Hits                                       67572    67576       +4     
- Misses                                     45685    45734      +49     
- Partials                                     776      778       +2     

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.hash-graph-sdk	10.88% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-isomorphic-utils	0.00% <ø> (ø)
rust.harpc-net	96.14% <ø> (-0.05%)	⬇️
rust.harpc-tower	66.80% <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-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	82.13% <43.24%> (-0.19%)	⬇️
rust.hashql-eval	68.54% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-hir	89.10% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-mir	88.51% <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.

[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	$$28.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 226 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.92 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.30 \mathrm{ms} \pm 30.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.41 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1001	$$12.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 66.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.71 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314	$$41.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 273 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.617 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$13.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 77.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.103 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1526	$$22.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 138 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.873 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078	$$29.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 197 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-30.599 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.62 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-81.915 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033	$$13.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 74.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-52.215 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102	$$3.63 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.726 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.82 \mathrm{ms} \pm 9.53 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.061 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 51	$$3.19 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.428 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269	$$4.97 \mathrm{ms} \pm 25.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.808 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.39 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.917 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 107	$$3.98 \mathrm{ms} \pm 23.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.516 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133	$$4.25 \mathrm{ms} \pm 23.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.040 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.28 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.672 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63	$$3.93 \mathrm{ms} \pm 27.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.58 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2	$$2.64 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}11.8 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.59 \mathrm{ms} \pm 9.90 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}11.0 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1	$$2.69 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}10.2 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8	$$2.84 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.92 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.74 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}9.20 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3	$$2.94 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}9.22 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52	$$2.94 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.53 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.63 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}9.06 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 25	$$2.80 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}9.20 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94	$$3.27 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.81 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.88 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.78 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 26	$$3.07 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.64 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66	$$3.18 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.27 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.84 \mathrm{ms} \pm 8.59 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.04 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29	$$3.07 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.91 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth	1 entities	$$38.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 168 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.25 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	10 entities	$$75.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 278 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.119 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	25 entities	$$43.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 184 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.34 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	5 entities	$$45.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 164 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.046 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	50 entities	$$53.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 267 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.17 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	1 entities	$$39.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 181 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.807 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	10 entities	$$417 \mathrm{ms} \pm 863 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.343 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	25 entities	$$94.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 438 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.133 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	5 entities	$$84.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 368 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.250 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	50 entities	$$312 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.68 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{red}13.7 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	1 entities	$$15.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 79.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.86 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	10 entities	$$14.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 71.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.05 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	25 entities	$$14.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 68.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.340 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	5 entities	$$16.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 425 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}12.5 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	50 entities	$$17.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 81.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.79 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$14.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 71.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.497 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$14.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 61.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.81 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	100 entities	$$14.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 52.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.02 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	1000 entities	$$15.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 65.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.76 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10000 entities	$$22.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 139 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.860 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	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	$$29.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 281 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.049 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1	$$29.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 281 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.32 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1	$$30.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 253 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.44 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1	$$29.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 251 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.166 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2	$$29.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 275 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.98 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1	$$29.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 285 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.206 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1	$$28.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 274 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.237 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1	$$30.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 252 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.13 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1	$$28.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 237 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.07 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id	Account ID: bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba	$$8.04 \mathrm{ms} \pm 35.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.07 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$46.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 546 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.16 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$93.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 374 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.36 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$52.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 306 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.53 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$60.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 336 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.54 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$67.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 350 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.28 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$74.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 424 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.62 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$48.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 197 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.611 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$76.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 348 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.13 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$55.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 247 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.058 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$63.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 370 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.66 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$65.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 344 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.07 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$65.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 315 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.633 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
full_test	query-limited	$$131 \mathrm{ms} \pm 394 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.024 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
full_test	query-unlimited	$$131 \mathrm{ms} \pm 469 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.124 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-limited	$$38.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 187 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-10.017 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-unlimited	$$546 \mathrm{ms} \pm 854 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.777 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph