BE-851: atlas: remove the single-generation serving layer

[indietyp]

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

Remove the single-generation serving layer from the atlas crate. The layer opens one generation per process and every route, codec and command reads through that one object, so a generation switch is a restart, and a restart drops every in-flight session. The multi-generation runtime replaces the layer whole rather than growing out of it: the new layer takes the module's name and its types collide with the old ones, so the two cannot stand in one crate.

For review, the property this stands on:

• Nothing outside the deleted modules referenced them. The crate and the graph binary build with the modules gone. Surviving files lose their mod and use lines and the Serve variant of the atlas subcommand (healthcheck stays). Crate-doc lines in lib.rs that linked to deleted items keep their words as plain code spans until the documentation rewrite (BE-856).

🔍 What does this change?

• serve/: the serving module with its delta consumer, hydration, schedules, visibility cache, density and tests.
• api/: the HTTP API that read from it.
• salt/wire/: the wire codecs only that API used.
• cli/serve and apps/hash-graph: the atlas serve command and its arguments.
• tests/route_fixture.rs: the route fixture over the deleted API.

⚠️ Breaking Changes & Known Issues

• Breaking: hash-graph atlas serve no longer exists. The binary fits and publishes generations and serves none until the runtime and its read API land (BE-815).

❓ How to test this?

1. cargo check -p hash-graph-atlas -p hash-graph --all-features --all-targets builds.
2. cargo run -p hash-graph -- atlas --help lists no serve subcommand.

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

[vercel]

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

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated
hash	Ready	Preview	Sep 15, 2026 2:49pm UTC
petrinaut	Ready	Preview	Sep 15, 2026 2:49pm UTC
petrinaut-docs	Ready	Preview	Sep 15, 2026 2:49pm UTC

1 Skipped Deployment

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated
hashdotdesign-tokens	Ignored	Preview	Sep 15, 2026 2:49pm UTC

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 0% with 13 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 65.71%. Comparing base (441d22e) to head (a4c187b).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
apps/hash-graph/src/subcommand/atlas.rs	0.00%	12 Missing ⚠️
apps/hash-graph/src/subcommand/mod.rs	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@                                     Coverage Diff                                      @@
##           bm/be-831-hashql-support-type-parameters-in-the-id-macro    #9705      +/-   ##
============================================================================================
- Coverage                                                     69.31%   65.71%   -3.60%     
============================================================================================
  Files                                                          1384     1712     +328     
  Lines                                                        133488   182323   +48835     
  Branches                                                       6723     7529     +806     
============================================================================================
+ Hits                                                          92527   119816   +27289     
- Misses                                                        39824    61086   +21262     
- Partials                                                       1137     1421     +284     

Flag	Coverage Δ
apps.hash-ai-worker-ts	1.99% <ø> (ø)
apps.hash-api	15.35% <ø> (ø)
apps.hash-graph	13.62% <0.00%> (+1.08%)	⬆️
blockprotocol.type-system	38.15% <ø> (?)
local.claude-hooks	0.00% <ø> (?)
local.harpc-client	51.49% <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> (?)
rust.error-stack	90.81% <ø> (?)
rust.harpc-codec	84.70% <ø> (?)
rust.harpc-net	96.21% <ø> (?)
rust.harpc-tower	67.03% <ø> (?)
rust.harpc-types	0.00% <ø> (?)
rust.harpc-wire-protocol	92.23% <ø> (?)
rust.hash-codec	72.76% <ø> (?)
rust.hash-config	81.14% <ø> (?)
rust.hash-graph-api	19.71% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-atlas	80.92% <ø> (+0.56%)	⬆️
rust.hash-graph-authentication	96.02% <ø> (?)
rust.hash-graph-authorization	63.14% <ø> (?)
rust.hash-graph-embeddings	91.88% <ø> (?)
rust.hash-graph-postgres-store	32.15% <ø> (?)
rust.hash-graph-store	48.41% <ø> (?)
rust.hash-graph-temporal-versioning	50.18% <ø> (?)
rust.hash-graph-types	0.00% <ø> (?)
rust.hash-graph-validation	84.71% <ø> (?)
rust.hash-middleware	90.92% <ø> (?)
rust.hashql-ast	89.63% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-compiletest	28.39% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-core	78.92% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-diagnostics	72.51% <ø> (?)
rust.hashql-eval	79.82% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-hir	89.09% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-mir	87.92% <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]

Merging this PR will improve performance by 18.95%

⚠️ 6 benchmarks measured no execution time

Nothing ran under measurement, usually because the compiler removed the code under test. These results are not comparable, so they count as unchanged.

Preventing compiler optimizations

⚠️ 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

⚡ 2 improved benchmarks
✅ 96 untouched benchmarks

Performance Changes

	Benchmark	BASE	HEAD	Efficiency
⚡	bit_matrix/dense/iter_row[64]	166.4 ns	137.2 ns	+21.26%
⚡	bit_matrix/dense/iter_row[200]	203.9 ns	174.7 ns	+16.69%
⚠️	as_constant	< 1 ns	< 1 ns	N/A
⚠️	constant_equal	< 1 ns	< 1 ns	N/A
⚠️	constant_not_equal	< 1 ns	< 1 ns	N/A
⚠️	access	< 1 ns	< 1 ns	N/A
⚠️	runtime_equal	< 1 ns	< 1 ns	N/A
⚠️	runtime_not_equal	< 1 ns	< 1 ns	N/A

Tip

Curious why performance improved? Comment @codspeedbot explain why performance improved on this PR, or directly use the CodSpeed MCP with your agent.

---

_{Comparing bm/be-851-atlas-remove-the-single-generation-serving-layer (474d97e) with bm/be-831-hashql-support-type-parameters-in-the-id-macro (13dcca9)}

[cursor]

PR Summary

High Risk
Deletes the production Atlas read API and hash-graph atlas serve entirely; nothing serves generations until the BE-815 replacement lands, and the change touches auth, visibility, and delta placement behavior by removal.

Overview
Removes the entire single-generation Atlas serving stack from hash-graph-atlas and the graph binary, ahead of the multi-generation runtime (BE-815). The deleted surface includes the serve module (delta consumer, visibility cache, hydration, schedules), the full api/ HTTP read API (manifest, tile, edges, locate, translate, OpenAPI, authority tokens), salt/wire codecs used only by that API, and cli/serve.

hash-graph atlas no longer exposes serve: the subcommand is reduced to fit and healthcheck, with the large Postgres pool / auth / Temporal / lifecycle wiring removed from apps/hash-graph/src/subcommand/atlas.rs. atlas no longer takes a Telemetry argument.

Build and tooling housekeeping: workspace [workspace.lints.cargo] temporarily allows unused dependencies (BE-850); the atlas crate adds matching #![allow(...)] for dead code and broken doc links until the stack lands. @rust/hash-graph-atlas drops the test:integration script and Turbo task entry.

Docs in lib.rs still mention serve / api as plain code spans until BE-856.

^{Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 474d97e. Bugbot is set up for automated code reviews on this repo. Configure here.}

[Copilot]

Copilot was unable to review this pull request because the user who requested the review has reached their quota limit.

[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	$$21.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 150 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.77 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.66 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.526 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1002	$$11.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 73.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}12.9 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314	$$34.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 274 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.569 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$11.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 117 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.368 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1527	$$19.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 137 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.97 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078	$$20.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 151 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.55 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.96 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.34 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033	$$10.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 96.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.36 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102	$$2.88 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.079 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.30 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.684 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 52	$$2.60 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.710 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269	$$4.00 \mathrm{ms} \pm 29.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.86 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.72 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.348 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 108	$$3.16 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.139 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133	$$3.37 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.535 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.67 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.39 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63	$$3.15 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.38 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2	$$2.10 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.500 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.05 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.111 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 2	$$2.17 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.058 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8	$$2.34 \mathrm{ms} \pm 8.73 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.559 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.23 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.14 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3	$$2.45 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.346 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52	$$2.36 \mathrm{ms} \pm 9.66 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.075 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.14 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.659 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 26	$$2.26 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.025 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94	$$2.70 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.527 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.34 \mathrm{ms} \pm 9.09 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.536 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 27	$$2.55 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.049 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66	$$2.61 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.714 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.35 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.225 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29	$$2.52 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.789 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth	1 entities	$$24.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 121 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.796 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	10 entities	$$53.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 422 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.78 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	25 entities	$$27.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 199 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.658 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	5 entities	$$29.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 214 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.861 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	50 entities	$$32.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 224 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.877 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	1 entities	$$25.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 141 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.300 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	10 entities	$$312 \mathrm{ms} \pm 858 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.51 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	25 entities	$$69.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 482 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.001 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	5 entities	$$53.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 370 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.452 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	50 entities	$$213 \mathrm{ms} \pm 675 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.623 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	1 entities	$$7.87 \mathrm{ms} \pm 48.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.201 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	10 entities	$$7.99 \mathrm{ms} \pm 45.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.525 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	25 entities	$$8.06 \mathrm{ms} \pm 44.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.396 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	5 entities	$$7.89 \mathrm{ms} \pm 35.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.092 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	50 entities	$$8.19 \mathrm{ms} \pm 51.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.98 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$7.96 \mathrm{ms} \pm 42.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.09 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$8.16 \mathrm{ms} \pm 51.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.75 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	100 entities	$$8.13 \mathrm{ms} \pm 41.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.72 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	1000 entities	$$7.99 \mathrm{ms} \pm 42.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.881 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10000 entities	$$8.25 \mathrm{ms} \pm 46.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.448 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	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	$$8.30 \mathrm{ms} \pm 41.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.373 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1	$$8.46 \mathrm{ms} \pm 60.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.80 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1	$$8.29 \mathrm{ms} \pm 51.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.621 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1	$$8.43 \mathrm{ms} \pm 50.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.06 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2	$$8.31 \mathrm{ms} \pm 47.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.55 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1	$$8.35 \mathrm{ms} \pm 70.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.638 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1	$$8.28 \mathrm{ms} \pm 47.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.55 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1	$$8.17 \mathrm{ms} \pm 42.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.171 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1	$$8.55 \mathrm{ms} \pm 47.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.12 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id	Account ID: bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba	$$6.07 \mathrm{ms} \pm 30.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.40 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$47.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 258 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.61 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$84.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 459 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.210 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$52.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 403 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.38 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$58.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 417 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.145 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$64.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 351 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.345 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$68.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 373 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.074 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$35.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 252 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.38 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$56.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 344 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.699 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$40.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 290 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.453 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$47.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 254 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.03 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$49.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 246 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.12 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$48.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 232 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.796 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
full_test	query-limited	$$95.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 403 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.85 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
full_test	query-unlimited	$$104 \mathrm{ms} \pm 364 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.21 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-limited	$$17.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 85.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.043 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-unlimited	$$416 \mathrm{ms} \pm 739 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.170 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph