Skip to content

Update GitHub Action mozilla-actions/sccache-action to v0.0.10#9009

Open
hash-worker[bot] wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
deps/gha/mozilla-actions-sccache-action-0.x
Open

Update GitHub Action mozilla-actions/sccache-action to v0.0.10#9009
hash-worker[bot] wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
deps/gha/mozilla-actions-sccache-action-0.x

Conversation

@hash-worker

@hash-worker hash-worker Bot commented Jul 11, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

This PR contains the following updates:

Package Type Update Change
mozilla-actions/sccache-action action patch v0.0.9 → v0.0.10

Warning

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

Release Notes

mozilla-actions/sccache-action (mozilla-actions/sccache-action)

v0.0.10

Compare Source

What's Changed

New Contributors

Full Changelog: Mozilla-Actions/sccache-action@v0.0.9...v0.0.10

Configuration

📅 Schedule: (UTC)

  • Branch creation
    • "before 2am on saturday"
  • Automerge
    • "before 4am every weekday,every weekend"

🚦 Automerge: Enabled.

♻ Rebasing: Whenever PR becomes conflicted, or you tick the rebase/retry checkbox.

🔕 Ignore: Close this PR and you won't be reminded about this update again.

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

This PR has been generated by Mend Renovate.

@hash-worker hash-worker Bot enabled auto-merge July 11, 2026 00:49
@cursor

cursor Bot commented Jul 11, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown

PR Summary

Low Risk
Single third-party GitHub Action patch bump in CI tooling only; no application, auth, or data-path changes.

Overview
Bumps mozilla-actions/sccache-action in the composite install-sccache action from v0.0.9 to v0.0.10, pinning the new commit SHA. No other workflow steps or sccache/R2 configuration change.

Upstream v0.0.10 mainly adjusts how the action installs sccache (e.g. tar on all platforms), improves cache-related annotations, and updates internal Node/deps—not this repo’s Vault secrets or start-sccache.sh behavior.

Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 60ec54a. Bugbot is set up for automated code reviews on this repo. Configure here.

@vercel

vercel Bot commented Jul 11, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown

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

Project Deployment Actions Updated (UTC)
hash Ready Ready Preview, Comment Jul 11, 2026 11:45am
hashdotdesign-tokens Ready Ready Preview, Comment Jul 11, 2026 11:45am
petrinaut Ready Ready Preview, Comment Jul 11, 2026 11:45am

@github-actions github-actions Bot added area/deps Relates to third-party dependencies (area) area/infra Relates to version control, CI, CD or IaC (area) labels Jul 11, 2026
@codecov

codecov Bot commented Jul 11, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 59.73%. Comparing base (6736174) to head (60ec54a).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files 
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #9009   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   59.73%   59.73%           
=======================================
  Files        1371     1371           
  Lines      135461   135461           
  Branches     6066     6066           
=======================================
  Hits        80911    80911           
  Misses      53618    53618           
  Partials      932      932
Flag Coverage Δ
apps.hash-ai-worker-ts 1.39% <ø> (ø)
apps.hash-api 6.39% <ø> (ø)
blockprotocol.type-system 40.84% <ø> (ø)
local.claude-hooks 0.00% <ø> (ø)
local.harpc-client 51.49% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-backend-utils 1.90% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-graph-sdk 10.02% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-isomorphic-utils 0.18% <ø> (ø)
rust.antsi 0.00% <ø> (ø)
rust.error-stack 90.89% <ø> (ø)
rust.harpc-codec 84.70% <ø> (ø)
rust.harpc-net 96.19% <ø> (ø)
rust.harpc-tower 67.03% <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 7.41% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-authorization 62.59% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-embeddings 91.88% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-postgres-store 29.13% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-store 38.47% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-temporal-versioning 47.95% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-types 0.00% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-validation 84.71% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-ast 89.63% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-compiletest 28.39% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-core 78.98% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-diagnostics 72.51% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-eval 80.04% <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-hq

codspeed-hq Bot commented Jul 11, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Merging this PR will not alter performance

✅ 98 untouched benchmarks

Comparing deps/gha/mozilla-actions-sccache-action-0.x (60ec54a) with main (5a90775)

Open in CodSpeed

@hash-worker hash-worker Bot force-pushed the deps/gha/mozilla-actions-sccache-action-0.x branch from 8cdcc53 to 60ec54a Compare July 11, 2026 11:31
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jul 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

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 $$27.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 208 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-8.369 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$3.56 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.038 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1002 $$12.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 108 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-7.155 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314 $$43.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 423 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.757 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$15.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 135 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.08 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1527 $$24.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 294 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.616 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078 $$29.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 299 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.086 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$3.91 \mathrm{ms} \pm 25.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.666 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033 $$14.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 127 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.913 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102 $$3.96 \mathrm{ms} \pm 31.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.43 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$3.08 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.77 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 52 $$3.47 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.824 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269 $$5.38 \mathrm{ms} \pm 38.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.400 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$3.67 \mathrm{ms} \pm 22.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.43 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 108 $$4.28 \mathrm{ms} \pm 29.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.33 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133 $$4.52 \mathrm{ms} \pm 36.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.269 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$3.54 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.982 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63 $$4.23 \mathrm{ms} \pm 33.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.05 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2 $$2.68 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.36 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.58 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.29 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 2 $$2.64 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.668 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8 $$2.90 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.455 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.73 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.32 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3 $$2.90 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.53 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52 $$3.13 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.03 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.84 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.84 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 26 $$3.07 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.71 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94 $$3.54 \mathrm{ms} \pm 26.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.792 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$3.09 \mathrm{ms} \pm 24.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.46 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 27 $$3.39 \mathrm{ms} \pm 22.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.97 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66 $$3.51 \mathrm{ms} \pm 24.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.17 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$3.04 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.43 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29 $$3.45 \mathrm{ms} \pm 26.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.74 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth 1 entities $$42.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 244 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.11 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth 10 entities $$33.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 234 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.84 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth 25 entities $$35.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 200 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.298 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth 5 entities $$32.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 198 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.36 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth 50 entities $$42.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 308 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.61 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth 1 entities $$50.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 383 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.37 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth 10 entities $$40.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 239 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.16 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth 25 entities $$93.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 551 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.20 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth 5 entities $$34.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 210 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.80 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth 50 entities $$283 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.06 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}1.45 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth 1 entities $$10.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 70.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.901 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth 10 entities $$10.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 60.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.150 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth 25 entities $$10.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 64.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.045 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth 5 entities $$10.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 73.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.200 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth 50 entities $$10.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 65.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.402 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
entity_by_id 1 entities $$10.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 80.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.165 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id 10 entities $$11.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 76.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.85 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id 100 entities $$11.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 91.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.49 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id 1000 entities $$11.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 82.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.49 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id 10000 entities $$11.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 75.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.916 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ 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 $$11.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 70.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.745 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1 $$11.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 71.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.46 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1 $$11.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 81.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.621 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1 $$11.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 64.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.267 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2 $$11.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 57.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.733 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1 $$11.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 81.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.22 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1 $$11.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 70.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.018 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1 $$11.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 54.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.880 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1 $$11.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 69.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.461 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id Account ID: bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba $$8.79 \mathrm{ms} \pm 44.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.581 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
entity_by_property traversal_paths=0 0 $$61.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 454 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.241 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property traversal_paths=255 1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true $$116 \mathrm{ms} \pm 600 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.232 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false $$66.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 526 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.791 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true $$75.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 464 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.920 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true $$87.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 513 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.675 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true $$94.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 655 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.216 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property traversal_paths=0 0 $$45.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 293 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.020 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property traversal_paths=255 1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true $$77.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 494 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.106 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false $$51.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 329 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.491 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true $$61.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 420 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.090 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true $$65.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 479 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.064 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true $$64.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 472 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.728 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
full_test query-limited $$121 \mathrm{ms} \pm 647 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.872 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
full_test query-unlimited $$131 \mathrm{ms} \pm 732 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.357 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
linked_queries query-limited $$19.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 137 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.06 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
linked_queries query-unlimited $$538 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.57 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}0.195 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

No reviews

Assignees

@indietyp indietyp

@TimDiekmann TimDiekmann

Labels

area/deps Relates to third-party dependencies (area) area/infra Relates to version control, CI, CD or IaC (area)

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants

@indietyp @TimDiekmann