BE-162: Refactor OntologyTypeVersion to support pre-release versions with lane-based drafts

[TimDiekmann]

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

This PR refactors the ontology type version system to support semantic versioning with pre-release/draft versions. Previously, OntologyTypeVersion was a simple u32 wrapper representing only published versions. Now it supports draft versions with lane-based isolation, enabling parallel development workflows while maintaining proper version ordering semantics.

The new URL format supports both published versions (v/2) and draft versions (v/2-draft.lane.5), following semantic versioning conventions where published versions have higher precedence than pre-release versions with the same major version.

🔗 Related links

• Linear issue: BE-162 (Implement pre-release parsing for OntologyTypeVersion)
• Follow-up: BE-161 (Allow IDs for pre-release types to be stored in Postgres)

🔍 What does this change?

Core Type System Changes

• Refactored OntologyTypeVersion structure (libs/@blockprotocol/type-system/rust/src/ontology/id/mod.rs)
  • Changed from simple u32 wrapper to struct with major: u32 and pre_release: Option<PreRelease>
  • Created PreRelease enum to support extensible pre-release types (currently only Draft variant)
  • Draft format: major-draft.lane.revision (e.g., 2-draft.abcd1234.5)
  • Lanes support dots for hierarchical naming (e.g., v1.alpha.3)
• Implemented semantic versioning ordering (libs/@blockprotocol/type-system/rust/src/ontology/id/mod.rs)
  • Published versions have higher precedence than drafts with same major version (v/2 > v/2-draft.x.y)
  • Draft versions ordered by lane (following SemVer rules) then revision (numeric)
  • Major version takes precedence across all comparisons
  • SemVer-compliant lane comparison: numeric identifiers compared numerically, alphanumeric compared lexicographically, numeric < alphanumeric
• Enhanced error types with structured validation (libs/@blockprotocol/type-system/rust/src/ontology/id/error.rs)
  • Added ParseOntologyTypeVersionError for version-specific errors with three variants:
    • MissingVersion - Empty version string
    • ParseVersion(String) - Invalid major version number
    • InvalidPreRelease(String, ParseDraftInfoError) - Draft format validation failures
  • Added ParseDraftInfoError for draft format validation with four variants:
    • IncorrectFormatting - Missing dot separator or empty lane
    • InvalidLane(String) - SemVer-invalid lane identifier
    • MissingRevision - Empty revision after dot
    • InvalidRevision(String, String) - Non-numeric or out-of-range revision
  • Changed ParseVersionedUrlError::InvalidVersion to use structured error types instead of strings
  • Error messages now provide detailed context about what's wrong and where

TypeScript/JavaScript Changes

• Updated URL validation (libs/@blockprotocol/type-system/typescript/src/native/url.ts)
  • Added regex pattern matching for draft versions with proper lane extraction
  • Validates both major version and revision numbers fit in u32 range
  • Handles draft and published versions uniformly in validation
• Implemented SemVer comparison logic (libs/@blockprotocol/type-system/typescript/src/native/url.ts)
  • compareOntologyTypeVersions() now properly handles draft versions
  • Added helper functions: isDraftVersion(), extractMajorVersion(), haveSameMajorVersion()
  • Matches Rust implementation's ordering semantics
• Fixed TypeScript type generation (libs/@blockprotocol/type-system/typescript/src/native/url.ts)
  • Error types now properly export structured error information instead of tuples
  • Error format changed from ["version", "error string"] to ["version", { reason: "...", inner: "..." }]

Database and API Updates

• Updated all call sites (34 files across libs/@local/graph/)
  • Changed OntologyTypeVersion::new() calls to struct initialization
  • Updated .inner() calls to .major field access
  • Modified ToSql/FromSql implementations to handle drafts (with TODO for full support)
  • Added errors for draft versions in Postgres (tracked in BE-161)

Testing Improvements

Comprehensive Rust Test Suite

Refactored existing tests to use from_str() and proper error handling:

• Changed from OntologyTypeVersion::new() to parsing from strings
• Updated function signatures to Result<(), Box<dyn Error>> for better error propagation
• Enhanced error validation to test actual error message content, not just error types

Added 11 new comprehensive test functions covering all edge cases:

1. ontology_version_parsing - Tests parsing both published (1, 42) and draft (2-draft.abcd1234.5) version strings, verifies structure and roundtrip
2. ontology_version_roundtrip - Ensures parse → serialize → parse consistency for multiple version formats
3. ontology_version_ordering_same_major - Tests SemVer ordering rules for same major version (published > draft, revision ordering)
4. ontology_version_ordering_different_major - Tests major version precedence across published and draft versions
5. ontology_version_ordering_different_lanes - Tests lane-based ordering (lexicographic comparison)
6. ontology_version_ordering_semver_prerelease_rules - Comprehensive SemVer validation:
   • Rule 1: Numeric identifiers compared numerically (2 < 10)
   • Rule 2: Alphanumeric compared lexicographically (alpha < beta)
   • Rule 3: Numeric < alphanumeric (999 < 123abc)
   • Rule 4: Revision number comparison within same lane
7. ontology_version_equality - Tests equality comparisons for published and draft versions
8. draft_url_parsing - Tests full URL parsing with draft versions and roundtrip
9. invalid_prerelease_identifiers_rejected - Tests rejection of:
   • Special characters in lane (abc,def)
   • Unicode characters in lane (🚀)
   • Validates specific error types and messages
10. missing_lane_rejected - Tests edge case: 1-draft.123 (only revision, no lane separator)
    • Validates ParseDraftInfoError::IncorrectFormatting
11. missing_revision_rejected - Tests edge case: 1-draft.lane. (lane present but empty revision)
    • Validates ParseDraftInfoError::MissingRevision with exact input tracking
12. invalid_revision_rejected - Tests rejection of:
    • Non-numeric revision (lane.abc) → InvalidRevision with message validation
    • Negative revision (lane.-5) → InvalidRevision with exact value tracking
    • Overflow cases (implicit in u32 parsing)
    • All cases validate error structure and message content
13. multiple_dots_in_lane_accepted - Tests hierarchical lanes (lane.with.dots.5, v1.alpha.3.10)
14. draft_in_lane_accepted - Tests lane names containing "draft" (my-draft.2)
15. build_is_rejected - Tests rejection of SemVer build metadata:
    • In draft versions (1-draft.lane.1+build.123)
    • In published versions (1+build.123)
    • In ambiguous formats (1+build-draft.123)

Key testing improvements:

• All error tests now validate the exact error variant, input tracking, and error message content
• Tests use pattern matching to ensure structured errors contain expected data
• Edge cases comprehensively covered: missing components, invalid formats, boundary conditions
• SemVer compliance thoroughly validated across all comparison rules

TypeScript Tests

Added TypeScript tests (libs/@blockprotocol/type-system/typescript/test/url.test.ts)

• Draft URL validation tests
• Version comparison tests
• Helper function tests
• Error case validation
• Snapshot tests updated for new error format

Integration Coverage

• All existing integration tests pass with updated version handling
• 34 files updated across graph API, store, and benchmark code

⚠️ Known issues

• Draft versions cannot be stored in Postgres yet: The ToSql implementation for OntologyTypeVersion includes an error (via todo!()) when attempting to serialize draft versions. This is intentional - draft support in the database layer is tracked separately in BE-161.
• Error type incompatibility: The error structure changed from simple strings to nested structured errors. This may affect error handling code that pattern matches on the old format.

🐾 Next steps

• BE-161: Implement Postgres storage for draft versions (requires schema changes and migration strategy)
• Consider error-stack migration: Multiple TODOs added indicating we should migrate to error-stack for better error handling (tracked in BE-160 subtask)

🛡 What tests cover this?

Rust Tests (in libs/@blockprotocol/type-system/rust/src/ontology/id/mod.rs)

Core functionality tests:

• ontology_version_parsing - Parsing published and draft versions
• ontology_version_roundtrip - Serialize/deserialize consistency
• ontology_version_ordering_same_major - SemVer ordering (same major)
• ontology_version_ordering_different_major - Major version precedence
• ontology_version_ordering_different_lanes - Lane-based ordering
• ontology_version_ordering_semver_prerelease_rules - Complete SemVer compliance validation
• ontology_version_equality - Equality comparisons
• draft_url_parsing - Full URL parsing with draft versions

Error validation tests:

• invalid_prerelease_identifiers_rejected - Special characters and Unicode rejection
• missing_lane_rejected - Edge case: only revision without lane (1-draft.123)
• missing_revision_rejected - Edge case: lane without revision (1-draft.lane.)
• invalid_revision_rejected - Non-numeric (abc), negative (-5), and overflow cases

Edge case tests:

• multiple_dots_in_lane_accepted - Hierarchical lane names (lane.with.dots)
• draft_in_lane_accepted - Lane names containing "draft"
• build_is_rejected - SemVer build metadata rejection

Updated existing tests:

• base_url_test - Updated for new error types
• versioned_url_test - Updated for structured errors
• record_id_conversions - Updated for new structure

TypeScript Tests (in libs/@blockprotocol/type-system/typescript/test/url.test.ts)

• Draft URL validation tests
• Version comparison tests covering all SemVer ordering scenarios
• Helper function tests (isDraftVersion, extractMajorVersion, etc.)
• Error message validation for invalid draft formats
• Snapshot tests updated for new error format

Integration Coverage

• All existing integration tests pass with updated version handling
• 34 files updated across graph API, store, and benchmark code

❓ How to test this?

Test Published Versions (No Behavior Change)

1. Checkout the branch
2. Run Rust tests: cargo nextest run --package type-system
3. Run TypeScript tests: turbo run test --filter '@blockprotocol/type-system'
4. Verify existing functionality unchanged

Test Draft Version Parsing

# Test Rust parsing
cargo test --package type-system ontology_version_parsing

# Test TypeScript validation
turbo run test --filter '@blockprotocol/type-system' -- url.test.ts

Test Version Ordering

1. Run ordering tests:
2. Verify SemVer semantics:
   • Published > Draft (same major): v/2 > v/2-draft.x.y
   • Major version precedence: v/3 > v/2 > v/1
   • Draft ordering: v/2-draft.a.1 < v/2-draft.b.1 < v/2-draft.b.2

Test Error Handling and Edge Cases

# Run all error validation tests
cargo test --package type-system rejected

# Test specific edge cases
cargo test --package type-system missing_lane_rejected
cargo test --package type-system missing_revision_rejected
cargo test --package type-system invalid_revision_rejected

Verify error messages provide detailed context:

• Missing lane: 1-draft.123 → IncorrectFormatting
• Missing revision: 1-draft.lane. → MissingRevision
• Invalid revision: 1-draft.lane.abc → InvalidRevision("abc", "invalid digit...")
• Negative revision: 2-draft.lane.-5 → InvalidRevision("-5", "invalid digit...")

Test Database Limitations (Expected Failure)

Attempting to serialize draft version to Postgres should panic with TODO message:

let draft = OntologyTypeVersion::from_str("2-draft.lane.5")?;
// This will panic with: "not yet implemented: https://linear.app/hash/issue/BE-161/..."
draft.to_sql(...)?;

📹 Demo

No visual demo needed - this is infrastructure work for the type system. The changes are visible in:

1. Rust code - New types and parsing logic
2. Test output - Comprehensive test coverage showing all scenarios
3. Error messages - Improved structured error reporting with detailed context

Example of new URL format support:

Published:  https://example.com/person/v/2
Draft:      https://example.com/person/v/2-draft.abcd1234.5
            ├─ major: 2
            ├─ pre_release.lane: "abcd1234"
            └─ pre_release.revision: 5

Ordering:
  v/1 < v/2-draft.lane.5 < v/2 < v/3

SemVer Lane Comparison:
  v/1-draft.2.1 < v/1-draft.10.1       (numeric: 2 < 10)
  v/1-draft.999.1 < v/1-draft.abc.1    (numeric < alphanumeric)
  v/1-draft.alpha.1 < v/1-draft.beta.1 (lexicographic)

Hierarchical Lanes:
  v/1-draft.lane.with.dots.5
  v/2-draft.v1.alpha.3.10

[TimDiekmann]

• BE-162: Refactor OntologyTypeVersion to support pre-release versions with lane-based drafts #7872 👈 (View in Graphite)
• main

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

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 35.84906% with 68 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 55.12%. Comparing base (bbbbc76) to head (51d72cc).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...kprotocol/type-system/typescript/src/native/url.ts	72.41%	3 Missing and 5 partials ⚠️
...uthorization/src/policies/cedar/expression_tree.rs	0.00%	6 Missing ⚠️
libs/@local/graph/store/src/filter/mod.rs	53.84%	6 Missing ⚠️
...ocal/graph/store/src/subgraph/identifier/vertex.rs	0.00%	6 Missing ⚠️
...i/src/rest/utoipa_typedef/subgraph/vertices/mod.rs	0.00%	4 Missing ⚠️
...rc/rest/utoipa_typedef/subgraph/vertices/vertex.rs	0.00%	4 Missing ⚠️
...s-store/src/snapshot/ontology/data_type/channel.rs	0.00%	4 Missing ⚠️
...store/src/snapshot/ontology/entity_type/channel.rs	0.00%	4 Missing ⚠️
libs/@local/graph/store/src/filter/parameter.rs	20.00%	4 Missing ⚠️
libs/@local/graph/store/src/subgraph/record.rs	0.00%	3 Missing ⚠️
... and 10 more

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #7872      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   55.13%   55.12%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files        1103     1103              
  Lines       98529    98664     +135     
  Branches     4575     4589      +14     
==========================================
+ Hits        54325    54387      +62     
- Misses      43585    43653      +68     
- Partials      619      624       +5     

Flag	Coverage Δ
apps.hash-ai-worker-ts	1.32% <ø> (ø)
apps.hash-api	0.00% <ø> (ø)
blockprotocol.type-system	40.84% <72.41%> (+4.98%)	⬆️
local.hash-backend-utils	4.06% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-graph-sdk	10.88% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-isomorphic-utils	0.00% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-api	2.93% <22.22%> (+0.08%)	⬆️
rust.hash-graph-authorization	62.50% <0.00%> (-0.09%)	⬇️
rust.hash-graph-postgres-store	19.66% <33.33%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
rust.hash-graph-store	31.00% <25.00%> (-0.66%)	⬇️
rust.hash-graph-types	0.00% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-validation	83.29% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-compiletest	53.03% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-eval	70.23% <ø> (+2.15%)	⬆️

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.

[graphite-app]

Graphite Automations

"Request Rust reviewers once CI passes" took an action on this PR • (10/15/25)

1 reviewer was added to this PR based on Tim Diekmann's automation.

"Request backend reviewers once CI passes" took an action on this PR • (10/15/25)

1 reviewer was added to this PR based on Tim Diekmann's automation.

Your organization requires reapproval when changes are made, so Graphite has dismissed approvals. See the output of git range-diff at https://github.com/hashintel/hash/actions/runs/18561030442

[indietyp]

thank you 🎉

[github-actions]

Benchmark results

@rust/hash-graph-benches – Integrations

policy_resolution_extra_large

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 10002	$$97.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 578 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.036 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$5.44 \mathrm{ms} \pm 27.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.864 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 5001	$$77.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 534 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.247 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 27604	$$292 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.30 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}1.48 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$20.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 185 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.369 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 13450	$$229 \mathrm{ms} \pm 900 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.430 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 11308	$$456 \mathrm{ms} \pm 2.24 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{red}161 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$6.41 \mathrm{ms} \pm 36.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.430 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 5628	$$67.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 3.93 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{lightgreen}-24.085 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_large

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2002	$$28.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 164 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.156 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.46 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.413 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1001	$$13.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 71.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.784 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314	$$38.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 315 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.300 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$13.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 58.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.46 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1526	$$24.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 149 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.687 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078	$$28.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 140 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-40.208 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.75 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.428 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033	$$11.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 79.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-39.836 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102	$$3.67 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.199 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.04 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.500 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 51	$$3.15 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-8.005 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269	$$5.32 \mathrm{ms} \pm 24.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.238 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.59 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.237 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 107	$$4.20 \mathrm{ms} \pm 22.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.091 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133	$$4.35 \mathrm{ms} \pm 32.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.678 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.27 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.695 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63	$$3.87 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-7.516 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2	$$2.58 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}9.60 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.56 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}10.9 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1	$$2.64 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.68 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8	$$2.84 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.58 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.72 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}10.3 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3	$$2.93 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.04 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52	$$3.01 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.48 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.67 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}9.85 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 25	$$2.87 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}11.4 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94	$$3.38 \mathrm{ms} \pm 22.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}9.15 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.90 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.51 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 26	$$3.14 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.85 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66	$$3.27 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.29 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.85 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.83 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29	$$3.20 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}11.6 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	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	$$30.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 276 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.702 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1	$$30.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 274 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.04 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1	$$30.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 299 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.417 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1	$$30.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 290 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.625 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2	$$30.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 272 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.496 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1	$$31.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 289 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.58 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1	$$31.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 255 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.67 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1	$$30.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 313 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.31 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1	$$30.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 259 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.234 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id	Account ID: bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba	$$9.22 \mathrm{ms} \pm 31.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.273 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$58.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 404 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.25 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$110 \mathrm{ms} \pm 471 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.481 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$61.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 238 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.320 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$70.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 372 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.796 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$79.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 290 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.339 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$87.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 318 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.313 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$51.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 356 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.53 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$78.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 333 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.793 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$55.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 283 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.76 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$65.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 263 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.259 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$66.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 272 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.225 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$66.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 277 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.817 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scaling_read_entity_complete_one_depth

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$48.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 201 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.984 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$58.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 452 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.185 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	25 entities	$$54.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 292 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.003 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	5 entities	$$52.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 415 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.574 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	50 entities	$$59.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 368 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.318 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

scaling_read_entity_complete_zero_depth

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$49.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 239 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.66 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$59.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 436 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.621 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	25 entities	$$54.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 194 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.013 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	5 entities	$$52.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 221 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.437 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	50 entities	$$74.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 373 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.30 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

scaling_read_entity_linkless

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$15.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 53.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.51 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$14.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 59.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.106 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	100 entities	$$14.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 86.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.06 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	1000 entities	$$15.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 88.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.288 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10000 entities	$$23.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 159 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.88 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

scenarios

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
full_test	query-limited	$$134 \mathrm{ms} \pm 537 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.170 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
full_test	query-unlimited	$$133 \mathrm{ms} \pm 464 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.374 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-limited	$$42.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 227 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-59.432 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-unlimited	$$576 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.12 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.179 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph