BE-317: HashQL: Implement `TraversalExtraction` pass #8331

indietyp · 2026-01-27T18:44:53Z

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

Add support for graph read filter bodies in MIR, enabling property path extraction for graph traversal.

🔍 What does this change?

Add GraphReadFilter as a new body source type in the MIR builder guide
Implement TraversalExtraction pass to materialize vertex projections in graph read filters
Update PostInline to run the traversal extraction pass and collect results
Add append method to IdVec for more efficient vector operations
Add type_id_unchecked and Display implementation for Place

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?

Comprehensive test suite for the traversal extraction pass covering various scenarios
Tests verify correct extraction of projections and traversal map generation

vercel · 2026-01-27T18:44:59Z

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

2 Skipped Deployments

Project	Deployment	Review	Updated (UTC)
hashdotdesign	Ignored	Preview	Jan 27, 2026 7:06pm
hashdotdesign-tokens	Ignored	Preview	Jan 27, 2026 7:06pm

cursor · 2026-01-27T18:45:00Z

PR Summary

Introduces graph read filter bodies and a new pass to extract vertex traversals, wiring it into the post-inline pipeline.

Adds Source::GraphReadFilter and body! macro support ([graph::read::filter]) with docs/examples
Implements TraversalExtraction to materialize projections from the vertex arg and record Traversals mappings; comprehensive tests/snapshots
Updates PostInline to require heap, run canonicalization then traversal extraction, and expose results via PostInlineResidual
Exposes Canonicalization::allocator[_mut] helpers
Extends utilities: IdVec::append, Place::type_id_unchecked, and Display for Place
Adjusts benches/tests/compiletest to construct PostInline::new_in(heap, scratch)

^{Written by Cursor Bugbot for commit 6ffafd7. This will update automatically on new commits. Configure here.}

indietyp · 2026-01-27T18:46:03Z

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

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

graphite-app · 2026-01-27T18:48:54Z

libs/@local/hashql/mir/src/pass/transform/traversal_extraction/mod.rs

+        let new_local = if let Some(offset) =
+            (self.pending_locals_offset..self.pending_locals.len()).find(|&index| {
+                self.traversals
+                    .lookup(self.total_locals.plus(self.pending_locals_offset + index))
+                    .is_some_and(|pending| pending.projections == place.projections)
+            }) {
+            self.total_locals.plus(offset)


Incorrect local ID calculation in deduplication logic

The code incorrectly computes the local ID when checking for existing extractions:

let new_local = if let Some(offset) = (self.pending_locals_offset..self.pending_locals.len()).find(|&index| { self.traversals .lookup(self.total_locals.plus(self.pending_locals_offset + index)) // BUG: double-adds offset .is_some_and(|pending| pending.projections == place.projections) }) { self.total_locals.plus(offset) // Returns: total_locals + index

Problem: Line 179 adds pending_locals_offset twice:

index already ranges from pending_locals_offset..pending_locals.len()

Then it adds pending_locals_offset + index again

But line 182 returns total_locals.plus(offset) where offset == index

Impact: The lookup searches for the wrong local ID (e.g., _110 instead of _105), causing deduplication to always fail. This creates duplicate extracted locals for the same projection within a basic block, violating the stated deduplication guarantee.

Fix:

let new_local = if let Some(offset) = (self.pending_locals_offset..self.pending_locals.len()).find(|&index| { self.traversals .lookup(self.total_locals.plus(index)) // Remove duplicate offset .is_some_and(|pending| pending.projections == place.projections) }) { self.total_locals.plus(offset)

Suggested change

let new_local = if let Some(offset) =

(self.pending_locals_offset..self.pending_locals.len()).find(|&index| {

self.traversals

.lookup(self.total_locals.plus(self.pending_locals_offset + index))

.is_some_and(|pending| pending.projections == place.projections)

}) {

self.total_locals.plus(offset)

let new_local = if let Some(offset) =

(self.pending_locals_offset..self.pending_locals.len()).find(|&index| {

self.traversals

.lookup(self.total_locals.plus(index))

.is_some_and(|pending| pending.projections == place.projections)

}) {

self.total_locals.plus(offset)

Spotted by Graphite Agent

Is this helpful? React 👍 or 👎 to let us know.

codspeed-hq · 2026-01-27T18:49:49Z

Merging this PR will not alter performance

✅ 21 untouched benchmarks
🗄️ 12 archived benchmarks run¹

_{Comparing bm/be-317-hashql-projectionextraction-for-entity-access (6ffafd7) with bm/be-315-hashql-differentiate-between-graphfilter-sources (f97b485)}

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. ↩

augmentcode · 2026-01-27T18:50:31Z

🤖 Augment PR Summary

Summary: This PR extends HashQL MIR to support graph read filter bodies and adds a new post-inlining transform to extract traversal paths.

Changes:

Introduced Source::GraphReadFilter and updated the MIR builder guide and body! macro to construct these bodies.
Added a TraversalExtraction transform pass that materializes vertex projections into explicit locals and records a per-body Traversals map.
Updated PostInline to run canonicalization then traversal extraction, and to accumulate traversal results via PostInline::finish.
Added IdVec::append for efficient vector draining/append operations.
Added Place::type_id_unchecked and a Display impl for easier diagnostics/printing.
Updated compiletests and benchmarks to the new PostInline::new_in(heap, alloc) constructor.
Added an extensive snapshot-based test suite for traversal extraction behavior.

Technical Notes: Traversal extraction only runs on GraphReadFilter bodies, deduplicates within a basic block, and preserves a mapping from extracted locals back to their original projection paths for later graph execution.

_{🤖 Was this summary useful? React with 👍 or 👎}

augmentcode

Review completed. 1 suggestions posted.

Comment augment review to trigger a new review at any time.

augmentcode · 2026-01-27T18:50:32Z

libs/@local/hashql/mir/src/pass/transform/traversal_extraction/mod.rs

+        let new_local = if let Some(offset) =
+            (self.pending_locals_offset..self.pending_locals.len()).find(|&index| {
+                self.traversals
+                    .lookup(self.total_locals.plus(self.pending_locals_offset + index))


The per-basic-block dedup check seems to miscompute the candidate local: index already ranges over absolute pending_locals indices, but the lookup uses pending_locals_offset + index, which will overshoot after the first block and prevent dedup in later blocks. This can lead to multiple extracted locals (and traversal entries) for the same projection within a single basic block.

_{🤖 Was this useful? React with 👍 or 👎}

codecov · 2026-01-27T18:57:50Z

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 97.03704% with 12 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 66.65%. Comparing base (f97b485) to head (6ffafd7).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...local/hashql/mir/src/pass/transform/post_inline.rs	75.00%	4 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
...mir/src/pass/transform/traversal_extraction/mod.rs	97.41%	2 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
.../hashql/mir/src/pass/transform/canonicalization.rs	50.00%	3 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@                                      Coverage Diff                                       @@
##           bm/be-315-hashql-differentiate-between-graphfilter-sources    #8331      +/-   ##
==============================================================================================
+ Coverage                                                       66.47%   66.65%   +0.18%     
==============================================================================================
  Files                                                             762      764       +2     
  Lines                                                           67681    68084     +403     
  Branches                                                         3799     3812      +13     
==============================================================================================
+ Hits                                                            44988    45382     +394     
- Misses                                                          22158    22164       +6     
- Partials                                                          535      538       +3

Flag	Coverage Δ
rust.hashql-compiletest	`46.65% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hashql-mir	`89.44% <97.03%> (+0.22%)`	⬆️

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.

libs/@local/hashql/mir/src/pass/transform/mod.rs

github-actions · 2026-01-27T20:17:05Z

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	$$25.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 134 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-7.166 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.18 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.451 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1001	$$12.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 71.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.528 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314	$$42.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 307 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.788 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$14.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 77.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.49 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1526	$$23.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 130 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.897 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078	$$26.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 132 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-39.092 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.57 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-82.067 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033	$$14.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 99.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-49.057 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102	$$3.62 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.463 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.81 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.548 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 51	$$3.17 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.116 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269	$$4.98 \mathrm{ms} \pm 26.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.296 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.34 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.868 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 107	$$3.96 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.751 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133	$$4.23 \mathrm{ms} \pm 25.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.607 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.25 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.762 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63	$$3.83 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.854 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2	$$2.56 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}9.90 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.45 \mathrm{ms} \pm 8.47 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.08 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1	$$2.57 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.05 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8	$$2.76 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.65 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.67 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.16 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3	$$2.84 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.94 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52	$$2.91 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.83 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.61 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.90 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 25	$$2.78 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.69 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94	$$3.23 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.51 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.87 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.57 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 26	$$3.06 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.55 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66	$$3.14 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.94 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.81 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.18 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29	$$3.08 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.57 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth	1 entities	$$39.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 139 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.04 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	10 entities	$$59.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 322 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-21.461 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	25 entities	$$43.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 151 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.13 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	5 entities	$$48.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 321 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.82 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	50 entities	$$54.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 255 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.95 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	1 entities	$$41.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 194 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.30 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	10 entities	$$244 \mathrm{ms} \pm 792 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-40.863 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	25 entities	$$94.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 448 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.16 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	5 entities	$$91.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 381 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}9.64 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	50 entities	$$311 \mathrm{ms} \pm 687 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.56 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	1 entities	$$14.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 61.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.11 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	10 entities	$$14.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 72.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.43 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	25 entities	$$15.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 80.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.19 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	5 entities	$$14.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 62.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.05 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	50 entities	$$19.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 94.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.99 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$14.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 82.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.04 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$14.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 84.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.87 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	100 entities	$$14.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 56.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.70 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	1000 entities	$$15.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 72.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.28 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10000 entities	$$22.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 139 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.29 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	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`	$$29.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 209 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.928 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1`	$$30.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 264 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.10 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1`	$$30.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 282 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.10 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1`	$$29.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 295 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.895 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2`	$$30.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 286 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.396 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1`	$$30.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 333 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.851 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1`	$$28.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 243 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.631 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1`	$$28.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 261 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.404 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1`	$$31.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 229 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.53 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id	Account ID: `bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba`	$$7.95 \mathrm{ms} \pm 27.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.09 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$46.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 200 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.932 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$93.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 380 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.215 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$52.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 225 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.916 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$60.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 265 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.728 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$68.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 335 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.643 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$75.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 290 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.671 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$50.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 311 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.27 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$77.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 387 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.760 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$56.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 196 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.326 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$65.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 387 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.59 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$66.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 357 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.422 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$66.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 305 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.562 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
full_test	query-limited	$$130 \mathrm{ms} \pm 440 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.84 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
full_test	query-unlimited	$$133 \mathrm{ms} \pm 518 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.98 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-limited	$$40.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 148 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-60.530 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-unlimited	$$559 \mathrm{ms} \pm 964 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-8.120 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

indietyp added 7 commits January 27, 2026 17:19

feat: traversal extraction

12ea999

feat: traversal extraction (II)

323bcf3

chore: docs

7e8d774

chore: docs

5e5c47a

feat: tests

d9fbd3b

feat: integration

89103ee

chore: fix benches

fbbc595

graphite-app bot assigned indietyp Jan 27, 2026

github-actions bot added area/infra Relates to version control, CI, CD or IaC (area) area/libs Relates to first-party libraries/crates/packages (area) type/eng > backend Owned by the @backend team area/tests New or updated tests labels Jan 27, 2026

indietyp mentioned this pull request Jan 27, 2026

BE-315: HashQL: Add GraphReadFilter source variant to MIR #8323

Open

3 tasks

graphite-app bot reviewed Jan 27, 2026

View reviewed changes

vercel bot deployed to Preview – petrinaut January 27, 2026 18:49 View deployment

augmentcode bot reviewed Jan 27, 2026

View reviewed changes

fix: review

5193581

vercel bot temporarily deployed to Preview – petrinaut January 27, 2026 18:52 Inactive

vercel bot deployed to Preview – hash January 27, 2026 19:00 View deployment

graphite-app bot reviewed Jan 27, 2026

View reviewed changes

libs/@local/hashql/mir/src/pass/transform/mod.rs Show resolved Hide resolved

fix: export residual

6ffafd7

vercel bot temporarily deployed to Preview – petrinaut January 27, 2026 19:06 Inactive

graphite-app bot requested review from a team January 27, 2026 20:09

BE-317: HashQL: Implement TraversalExtraction pass #8331

Are you sure you want to change the base?

BE-317: HashQL: Implement TraversalExtraction pass #8331

Conversation

indietyp commented Jan 27, 2026

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

🔍 What does this change?

Pre-Merge Checklist 🚀

🚢 Has this modified a publishable library?

📜 Does this require a change to the docs?

🕸️ Does this require a change to the Turbo Graph?

🛡 What tests cover this?

Uh oh!

vercel bot commented Jan 27, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

cursor bot commented Jan 27, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

PR Summary

Uh oh!

indietyp commented Jan 27, 2026

Uh oh!

graphite-app bot Jan 27, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

codspeed-hq bot commented Jan 27, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Merging this PR will not alter performance

Footnotes

Uh oh!

augmentcode bot commented Jan 27, 2026

Uh oh!

augmentcode bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

augmentcode bot Jan 27, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Jan 27, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Jan 27, 2026

Benchmark results

@rust/hash-graph-benches – Integrations

policy_resolution_large

policy_resolution_medium

policy_resolution_none

policy_resolution_small

read_scaling_complete

read_scaling_linkless

representative_read_entity

representative_read_entity_type

representative_read_multiple_entities

scenarios

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

BE-317: HashQL: Implement `TraversalExtraction` pass #8331

BE-317: HashQL: Implement `TraversalExtraction` pass #8331

vercel bot commented Jan 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading

cursor bot commented Jan 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codspeed-hq bot commented Jan 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Jan 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading