Update opentelemetry Rust crates

[hash-worker]

This PR contains the following updates:

Package	Type	Update	Change
opentelemetry (source)	workspace.dependencies	minor	0.30.0 -> 0.31.0
opentelemetry-appender-tracing (source)	workspace.dependencies	minor	0.30.1 -> 0.31.0
opentelemetry-otlp (source)	workspace.dependencies	minor	0.30.0 -> 0.31.0
opentelemetry-semantic-conventions (source)	workspace.dependencies	minor	0.30.0 -> 0.31.0
opentelemetry_sdk (source)	workspace.dependencies	minor	0.30.0 -> 0.31.0
tracing-opentelemetry	workspace.dependencies	minor	0.31.0 -> 0.32.0

---

Warning

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

---

Release Notes

open-telemetry/opentelemetry-rust (opentelemetry)

v0.31.0

Compare Source

Released 2025-Sep-25

• Breaking Change return type of opentelemetry::global::set_tracer_provider to Unit to align with metrics counterpart
• Add get_all method to opentelemetry::propagation::Extractor to return all values of the given propagation key and provide a default implementation.
• Add an IntoIterator implementation for opentelemetry::trace::TraceState to allow iterating through its key-value pair collection.

open-telemetry/opentelemetry-rust (opentelemetry-appender-tracing)

v0.31.1

Released 2025-Oct-1

• Bump tracing-opentelemetry to 0.32

v0.31.0

Released 2025-Sep-25

• Updated opentelemetry dependency to version 0.31.0.

open-telemetry/opentelemetry-rust (opentelemetry-otlp)

v0.31.0

Compare Source

Released 2025-Sep-25

• Update opentelemetry-proto and opentelemetry-http dependency version to 0.31.0
• Add HTTP compression support with gzip-http and zstd-http feature flags
• Add retry with exponential backoff and throttling support for HTTP and gRPC exporters
  This behaviour is opt in via the experimental-grpc-retry and experimental-http-retry flags on this crate. You can customize the retry policy using the with_retry_policy on the exporter builders.

open-telemetry/opentelemetry-rust (opentelemetry-semantic-conventions)

v0.31.0

Compare Source

Released 2025-Sep-25

• Update to v1.34.0 of the semantic conventions.

open-telemetry/opentelemetry-rust (opentelemetry_sdk)

v0.31.0

Compare Source

Released 2025-Sep-25

• Updated opentelemetry and opentelemetry-http dependencies to version 0.31.0.

• Feature: Add span flags support for isRemote property in OTLP exporter (#​3153)

• Updated span and link transformations to properly set flags field (0x100 for local, 0x300 for remote)

• TODO: Placeholder for Span processor related things

  • Fix SpanProcessor::on_start is no longer called on non recording spans

• Fix: Restore true parallel exports in the async-native BatchSpanProcessor by honoring OTEL_BSP_MAX_CONCURRENT_EXPORTS (#​2959). A regression in #​2685 inadvertently awaited the export() future directly in opentelemetry-sdk/src/trace/span_processor_with_async_runtime.rs instead of spawning it on the runtime, forcing all exports to run sequentially.

• Feature: Added Clone implementation to SdkLogger for API consistency with SdkTracer (#​3058).

• Fix: batch size accounting in BatchSpanProcessor when queue is full (#​3089).

• Fix: Resolved dependency issue where the "logs" feature incorrectly
  required the "trace" feature flag
  (#​3096).
  The logs functionality now operates independently, while automatic correlation
  between logs and traces continues to work when the "trace" feature is
  explicitly enabled.

• Fix: Fix shutdown of SimpleLogProcessor and async BatchLogProcessor.

• Default implementation of LogProcessor::shutdown_with_timeout() will now warn to encourage users to implement proper shutdown.

tokio-rs/tracing-opentelemetry (tracing-opentelemetry)

v0.32.0

Compare Source

Added

• Add configuration for including target in spans (#​222)

Changed

• OpenTelemetry context activation (#​202)
  • Trace ID and span ID can be obtained from OtelData via dedicated functions. Note that these
    will be available only if the context has already been built. (#​233)
• Correctly track entered and exited state for timings (#​212)
• Slightly improve error message on version mismatch (#​211)
• Remove Lazy for thread_local static (#​215)
• Update description of special fields and semantic conventions

Breaking Changes

• The attributes code.filepath, code.lineno, and code.namespace have been renamed to
  code.file.path, and code.line.number, and code.module.name, to align with the opentelemetry
  semantic conventions for code. (#​225)
• Upgrade from opentelemetry to 0.31.0. Refer to the upstream
  changelog
  for more information. (#​230)
• Hold onto MetricsProvider in MetricsLayer (#​224)
• The attribute otel.status_message was changed to otel.status_description to align with the
  opentelemetry semantic conventions for code. (#​209)
• Remove the metrics_gauge_unstable feature.

---

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.

👻 Immortal: This PR will be recreated if closed unmerged. Get config help if that's undesired.

---

• If you want to rebase/retry this PR, check this box

---

This PR has been generated by Renovate Bot.

[hash-worker]

⚠️ Artifact update problem

Renovate failed to update an artifact related to this branch. You probably do not want to merge this PR as-is.

♻ Renovate will retry this branch, including artifacts, only when one of the following happens:

• any of the package files in this branch needs updating, or
• the branch becomes conflicted, or
• you click the rebase/retry checkbox if found above, or
• you rename this PR's title to start with "rebase!" to trigger it manually

The artifact failure details are included below:

File name: Cargo.lock

Command failed: cargo update --config net.git-fetch-with-cli=true --manifest-path Cargo.toml --package [email protected] --precise 0.31.0
    Updating crates.io index
error: failed to select a version for the requirement `opentelemetry = "^0.30.0"`
candidate versions found which didn't match: 0.31.0
location searched: crates.io index
required by package `tarpc v0.36.0 (https://github.com/google/tarpc?rev=f55f36d2d876b1868cfcf52f41d0456a60cf726c#f55f36d2)`
    ... which satisfies git dependency `tarpc` (locked to 0.36.0) of package `hash-graph v0.0.0 (/tmp/renovate/repos/github/hashintel/hash/apps/hash-graph)`

[vercel]

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

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
ds-theme	Ready	Preview, Comment	Feb 17, 2026 9:40am
hash	Ready	Preview, Comment	Feb 17, 2026 9:40am
hashdotdesign	Ready	Preview, Comment	Feb 17, 2026 9:40am
hashdotdesign-tokens	Ready	Preview, Comment	Feb 17, 2026 9:40am
petrinaut	Ready	Preview	Feb 17, 2026 9:40am

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 60.80%. Comparing base (7d0f697) to head (296ff99).

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #8013   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   60.80%   60.80%           
=======================================
  Files        1273     1273           
  Lines      124456   124456           
  Branches     5354     5354           
=======================================
  Hits        75670    75670           
  Misses      47902    47902           
  Partials      884      884           

Flag	Coverage Δ
apps.hash-ai-worker-ts	1.40% <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	7.78% <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	2.86% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-authorization	62.34% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-postgres-store	27.20% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-store	37.86% <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	29.69% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-core	81.33% <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	90.25% <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.

[cursor]

PR Summary

Medium Risk
Dependency-only change, but these upgrades include upstream breaking changes in OpenTelemetry/tracing integration that can cause compile failures or subtle changes in emitted span/attribute semantics.

Overview
Updates workspace telemetry dependencies by bumping opentelemetry, opentelemetry-appender-tracing, opentelemetry-otlp, opentelemetry-semantic-conventions, and opentelemetry_sdk from 0.30.x to 0.31.0, and tracing-opentelemetry from 0.31.0 to 0.32.0 in Cargo.toml.

^{Written by Cursor Bugbot for commit 296ff99. This will update automatically on new commits. Configure here.}

[codspeed-hq]

Merging this PR will not alter performance

✅ 21 untouched benchmarks
🗄️ 12 archived benchmarks run¹

---

_{Comparing deps/rs/opentelemetry-rust-crates (296ff99) with main (7d0f697)}

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. ↩

[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	$$27.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 177 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.148 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.55 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.713 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1001	$$12.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 93.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-11.539 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314	$$44.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 329 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.313 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$15.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 91.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.938 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1526	$$24.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 147 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.753 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078	$$28.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 162 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.248 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.86 \mathrm{ms} \pm 22.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.189 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033	$$13.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 94.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-10.399 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102	$$3.95 \mathrm{ms} \pm 23.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.841 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.12 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.834 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 51	$$3.48 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.183 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269	$$5.36 \mathrm{ms} \pm 28.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.325 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.68 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.558 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 107	$$4.30 \mathrm{ms} \pm 22.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.383 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133	$$4.70 \mathrm{ms} \pm 34.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.325 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.57 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.285 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63	$$4.20 \mathrm{ms} \pm 22.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.949 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2	$$2.87 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.355 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.80 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.364 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1	$$2.89 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.321 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8	$$3.20 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.402 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.99 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.251 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3	$$3.30 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.038 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52	$$3.36 \mathrm{ms} \pm 24.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.20 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.05 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.59 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 25	$$3.20 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.73 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94	$$3.75 \mathrm{ms} \pm 23.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.11 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.25 \mathrm{ms} \pm 22.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.636 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 26	$$3.58 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.87 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66	$$3.77 \mathrm{ms} \pm 33.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.41 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.33 \mathrm{ms} \pm 22.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.82 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29	$$3.68 \mathrm{ms} \pm 35.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.54 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth	1 entities	$$41.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 196 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.021 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	10 entities	$$78.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 533 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.544 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	25 entities	$$46.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 235 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.658 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	5 entities	$$48.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 298 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.836 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	50 entities	$$55.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 358 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.421 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	1 entities	$$43.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 203 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.962 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	10 entities	$$413 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.08 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}-1.666 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	25 entities	$$98.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 492 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.195 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	5 entities	$$87.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 395 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.082 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	50 entities	$$319 \mathrm{ms} \pm 913 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.659 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	1 entities	$$15.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 81.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.587 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	10 entities	$$16.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 116 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-8.431 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	25 entities	$$16.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 96.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.917 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	5 entities	$$15.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 88.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.854 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	50 entities	$$19.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 161 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.809 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$15.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 97.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.317 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$15.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 82.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.214 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	100 entities	$$15.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 95.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.914 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	1000 entities	$$16.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 81.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.535 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10000 entities	$$24.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 173 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.618 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	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	$$31.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 251 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.114 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1	$$32.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 283 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.338 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1	$$31.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 264 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-9.280 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1	$$31.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 304 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-7.408 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2	$$31.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 305 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.503 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1	$$32.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 292 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.304 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1	$$32.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 327 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.631 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1	$$31.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 302 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.789 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1	$$31.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 293 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-8.764 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id	Account ID: bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba	$$8.93 \mathrm{ms} \pm 45.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.749 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$96.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 441 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.071 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$145 \mathrm{ms} \pm 671 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.078 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$97.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 522 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-10.720 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$107 \mathrm{ms} \pm 532 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-10.208 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$116 \mathrm{ms} \pm 528 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.731 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$122 \mathrm{ms} \pm 623 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.062 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$91.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 553 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.78 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$117 \mathrm{ms} \pm 600 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.202 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$98.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 547 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.642 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$105 \mathrm{ms} \pm 611 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.841 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$107 \mathrm{ms} \pm 537 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.042 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$107 \mathrm{ms} \pm 602 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.858 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
full_test	query-limited	$$137 \mathrm{ms} \pm 651 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.70 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
full_test	query-unlimited	$$136 \mathrm{ms} \pm 721 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.08 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-limited	$$110 \mathrm{ms} \pm 645 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}88.1 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-unlimited	$$595 \mathrm{ms} \pm 3.38 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}4.15 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph