Update `eslint` npm packages by hash-worker[bot] · Pull Request #8538 · hashintel/hash

hash-worker · 2026-03-13T00:42:02Z

This PR contains the following updates:

Package	Change	Age	Confidence
eslint (source)	`9.39.3` -> `9.39.4`
eslint-plugin-storybook (source)	`10.2.10` -> `10.2.19`

Warning

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

Release Notes

eslint/eslint (eslint)

`v9.39.4`

Compare Source

Bug Fixes

f18f6c8 fix: update dependency minimatch to ^3.1.5 (#20564) (Milos Djermanovic)
a3c868f fix: update dependency @eslint/eslintrc to ^3.3.4 (#20554) (Milos Djermanovic)
234d005 fix: minimatch security vulnerability patch for v9.x (#20549) (Andrej Beles)
b1b37ee fix: update ajv to 6.14.0 to address security vulnerabilities (#20538) (루밀LuMir)

Documentation

4675152 docs: add deprecation notice partial (#20520) (Milos Djermanovic)

Chores

b8b4eb1 chore: update dependencies for ESLint v9.39.4 (#20596) (Francesco Trotta)
71b2f6b chore: package.json update for @eslint/js release (Jenkins)
1d16c2f ci: pin Node.js 25.6.1 (#20563) (Milos Djermanovic)

storybookjs/storybook (eslint-plugin-storybook)

`v10.2.19`

Compare Source

Maintenance: Support vite-plugin-svelte@7 which supports Vite 8 - #34115, thanks @valentinpalkovic!
Vite: Support Vite 8 - #33788, thanks @valentinpalkovic!

`v10.2.18`

Compare Source

Core: Correctly fallback to first detected vitest config file - #33865, thanks @yannbf!
Core: Fix error reporting in ManagerErrorBoundary - #33915, thanks @ghengeveld!

`v10.2.17`

Compare Source

Next.js: Add support for v16.2 - #34046, thanks @valentinpalkovic!

`v10.2.16`

Compare Source

CSF-Factories: Fix ConfigFile parser false warning on definePreview({...}).type<T>() export default - #33885, thanks @copilot-swe-agent!
Core: Add host/origin validation to requests and websocket connections - #33835, thanks @ghengeveld!
Core: Add vike metadata frameworks - #33965, thanks @yannbf!
Core: Resolve builder preset path correctly in pnpm strict mode - #34032, thanks @braedenfoster!
Core: Update default allowed hosts in host validation middleware - #34045, thanks @ghengeveld!

`v10.2.15`

Compare Source

Core: Storybook failed to load iframe.html when publishing - #33896, thanks @danielalanbates!
Manager-API: Update refs sequentially in experimental_setFilter - #33958, thanks @ia319!
React: Handle render identifier in manifest snippet generation - #33940, thanks @kasperpeulen!

`v10.2.14`

Compare Source

CLI: Set STORYBOOK environment variable - #33938, thanks @yannbf!
UI: Prevent crash when tag filters contain undefined entries - #33931, thanks @abhaysinh1000!

`v10.2.13`

Compare Source

Addon Pseudo-states: Process all nested css rules - #33605, thanks @hpohlmeyer!
Builder-Vite: Prevent config duplication - #33883, thanks @copilot-swe-agent!
CLI: Fix React native web A11y issues - #33937, thanks @jonniebigodes!
Core: Avoid hanging when inferring args for recursive calls on DOM elemens - #33922, thanks @valentinpalkovic!
Eslint: Fix ESLint 10 compatibility in eslint-plugin-storybook rules - #33884, thanks @copilot-swe-agent!
Viewport: Prioritize story viewport globals and avoid user-global pollution - #33849, thanks @ia319!

`v10.2.12`

Compare Source

Core: Sanitize inputs for save from controls - #33868, thanks @valentinpalkovic!
Telemetry: Add project age - #33910, thanks @shilman!
Webpack: Improve performance of module-mocking plugins - #33169, thanks @valentinpalkovic!

`v10.2.11`

Compare Source

Addon-Vitest: Fix postinstall a11y installation - #33888, thanks @valentinpalkovic!
Manifests: Use correct story name - #33709, thanks @JReinhold!
Next.js: Handle legacyBehavior prop in Link mock component - #33862, thanks @yatishgoel!
React: Fix manifest stories empty when meta has no explicit title - #33878, thanks @kasperpeulen!

Configuration

📅 Schedule: Branch creation - "before 4am every weekday,every weekend" (UTC), Automerge - At any time (no schedule defined).

🚦 Automerge: Enabled.

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

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

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

This PR has been generated by Renovate Bot.

vercel · 2026-03-13T00:42:08Z

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

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
hash	Ready	Preview, Comment	Mar 16, 2026 3:49pm
hashdotdesign	Ready	Preview, Comment	Mar 16, 2026 3:49pm
hashdotdesign-tokens	Ready	Preview, Comment	Mar 16, 2026 3:49pm
petrinaut	Ready	Preview, Comment	Mar 16, 2026 3:49pm

cursor · 2026-03-13T00:42:08Z

PR Summary

Low Risk
Dev-tooling-only version bumps; main risk is minor lint/CI behavior changes due to updated ESLint and transitive deps.

Overview
Updates eslint from 9.39.3 to 9.39.4 across multiple workspace package.json files (apps, libs, tests), keeping the repo’s lint tooling in sync.

Also bumps eslint-plugin-storybook to 10.2.19 in Storybook-using packages and updates yarn.lock accordingly, pulling in upstream transitive changes (e.g. @eslint/*, minimatch, ajv).

^{Written by Cursor Bugbot for commit 15b67a0. This will update automatically on new commits. Configure here.}

augmentcode · 2026-03-13T00:43:35Z

🤖 Augment PR Summary

Summary: This PR updates ESLint-related tooling versions across the monorepo to pick up the latest patch releases.

Changes:

Bumps eslint from 9.39.3 to 9.39.4 in multiple workspace package.json files.
Bumps eslint-plugin-storybook from 10.2.10 to 10.2.17 where it’s used (including the shared @local/eslint config package).
Updates the dependency set primarily for bugfixes and security patches included in the upstream releases.

Technical Notes:

This is a patch-level upgrade; no code behavior changes are introduced directly, but linting results may change slightly.
Ensure CI lint and Storybook lint rules continue to pass with the updated plugin versions.

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

augmentcode

Review completed. No suggestions at this time.

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

codspeed-hq · 2026-03-13T00:47:35Z

Merging this PR will not alter performance

✅ 80 untouched benchmarks

_{Comparing deps/js/eslint-npm-packages (15b67a0) with main (46e4caf)¹}

No successful run was found on main (0043f72) during the generation of this report, so 46e4caf was used instead as the comparison base. There might be some changes unrelated to this pull request in this report. ↩

codecov · 2026-03-13T00:48:44Z

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 62.65%. Comparing base (637b75b) to head (15b67a0).
⚠️ Report is 4 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #8538      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   62.65%   62.65%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files        1314     1314              
  Lines      133870   133871       +1     
  Branches     5517     5517              
==========================================
  Hits        83877    83877              
- Misses      49078    49079       +1     
  Partials      915      915

Flag	Coverage Δ
apps.hash-ai-worker-ts	`1.40% <ø> (ø)`
apps.hash-api	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
blockprotocol.type-system	`40.84% <ø> (ø)`
local.claude-hooks	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
local.harpc-client	`51.24% <ø> (ø)`
local.hash-graph-sdk	`9.63% <ø> (ø)`
local.hash-isomorphic-utils	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
rust.antsi	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
rust.error-stack	`90.88% <ø> (ø)`
rust.harpc-codec	`84.70% <ø> (ø)`
rust.harpc-net	`96.16% <ø> (ø)`
rust.harpc-tower	`66.80% <ø> (ø)`
rust.harpc-types	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
rust.harpc-wire-protocol	`92.23% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hash-codec	`72.76% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hash-graph-api	`2.61% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hash-graph-authorization	`62.34% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hash-graph-postgres-store	`26.65% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hash-graph-store	`37.88% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hash-graph-temporal-versioning	`47.95% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hash-graph-types	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hash-graph-validation	`83.45% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hashql-ast	`87.23% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hashql-compiletest	`29.69% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hashql-core	`82.29% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hashql-diagnostics	`72.43% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hashql-eval	`69.13% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hashql-hir	`89.06% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hashql-mir	`92.64% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hashql-syntax-jexpr	`94.05% <ø> (ø)`

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

github-actions · 2026-03-16T16:54:24Z

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	$$28.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 192 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.07 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.53 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.044 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1001	$$12.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 79.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.937 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314	$$43.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 360 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.364 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$14.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 92.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.279 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1526	$$24.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 168 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.006 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078	$$29.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 149 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.045 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.86 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.771 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033	$$13.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 123 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.58 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102	$$3.91 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.122 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.11 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.179 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 51	$$3.49 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.313 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269	$$5.37 \mathrm{ms} \pm 29.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.297 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.72 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.17 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 107	$$4.30 \mathrm{ms} \pm 24.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.69 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133	$$4.67 \mathrm{ms} \pm 35.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.29 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.58 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.256 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63	$$4.24 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.36 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2	$$2.84 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.290 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.79 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.090 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1	$$2.92 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.014 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8	$$3.19 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.652 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.96 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.391 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3	$$3.29 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.617 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52	$$3.17 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.349 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.88 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.126 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 25	$$3.08 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.025 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94	$$3.61 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.095 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.15 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.959 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 26	$$3.40 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.962 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66	$$3.59 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.067 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.14 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.557 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29	$$3.47 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.672 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth	1 entities	$$45.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 198 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.853 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	10 entities	$$83.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 469 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.616 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	25 entities	$$51.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 264 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.30 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	5 entities	$$52.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 380 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.176 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	50 entities	$$61.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 408 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.025 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	1 entities	$$47.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 245 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.082 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	10 entities	$$424 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.07 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}0.519 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	25 entities	$$101 \mathrm{ms} \pm 569 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.296 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	5 entities	$$91.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 475 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.378 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	50 entities	$$292 \mathrm{ms} \pm 798 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.00 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	1 entities	$$19.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 77.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.851 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	10 entities	$$20.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 112 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.628 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	25 entities	$$20.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 119 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.985 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	5 entities	$$20.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 117 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.614 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	50 entities	$$24.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 146 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.369 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$19.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 102 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.093 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$19.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 98.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.00 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	100 entities	$$19.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 78.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.356 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	1000 entities	$$19.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 85.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.540 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10000 entities	$$26.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 180 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.80 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	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`	$$34.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 293 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.447 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1`	$$34.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 269 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.845 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1`	$$35.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 292 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.962 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1`	$$35.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 303 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.98 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2`	$$34.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 296 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.127 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1`	$$34.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 314 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.387 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1`	$$34.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 284 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.115 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1`	$$33.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 318 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.330 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1`	$$35.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 295 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.03 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id	Account ID: `bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba`	$$8.63 \mathrm{ms} \pm 45.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.020 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$94.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 478 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.13 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$146 \mathrm{ms} \pm 585 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.965 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$101 \mathrm{ms} \pm 469 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.583 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$109 \mathrm{ms} \pm 411 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.289 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$118 \mathrm{ms} \pm 590 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.03 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$126 \mathrm{ms} \pm 620 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.92 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$101 \mathrm{ms} \pm 504 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.331 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$130 \mathrm{ms} \pm 730 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.169 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$109 \mathrm{ms} \pm 710 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.00 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$118 \mathrm{ms} \pm 689 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.45 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$119 \mathrm{ms} \pm 666 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.063 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$120 \mathrm{ms} \pm 758 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.25 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
full_test	query-limited	$$132 \mathrm{ms} \pm 563 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.761 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
full_test	query-unlimited	$$144 \mathrm{ms} \pm 618 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.274 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-limited	$$105 \mathrm{ms} \pm 459 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.017 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-unlimited	$$591 \mathrm{ms} \pm 3.03 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{red}6.49 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

hash-worker bot enabled auto-merge March 13, 2026 00:42

augmentcode bot reviewed Mar 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

vercel bot deployed to Preview – hashdotdesign-tokens March 13, 2026 00:43 View deployment

vercel bot deployed to Preview – hashdotdesign March 13, 2026 00:44 View deployment

vercel bot deployed to Preview – petrinaut March 13, 2026 00:44 View deployment

vercel bot deployed to Preview – hash March 13, 2026 00:56 View deployment

graphite-app bot requested review from a team March 13, 2026 01:05

hash-worker bot force-pushed the deps/js/eslint-npm-packages branch from d1c58c0 to 665c682 Compare March 13, 2026 18:19

vercel bot deployed to Preview – hashdotdesign-tokens March 13, 2026 18:22 View deployment

vercel bot deployed to Preview – hashdotdesign March 13, 2026 18:22 View deployment

vercel bot deployed to Preview – petrinaut March 13, 2026 18:31 View deployment

vercel bot deployed to Preview – hash March 13, 2026 18:33 View deployment

hash-worker bot force-pushed the deps/js/eslint-npm-packages branch from 665c682 to 4885a33 Compare March 15, 2026 19:46

vercel bot deployed to Preview – hashdotdesign-tokens March 15, 2026 19:49 View deployment

vercel bot deployed to Preview – hashdotdesign March 15, 2026 19:49 View deployment

vercel bot deployed to Preview – petrinaut March 15, 2026 19:50 View deployment

vercel bot deployed to Preview – hash March 15, 2026 19:59 View deployment

hash-worker bot force-pushed the deps/js/eslint-npm-packages branch from 4885a33 to 54ad69f Compare March 16, 2026 10:58

vercel bot deployed to Preview – hashdotdesign-tokens March 16, 2026 11:01 View deployment

vercel bot deployed to Preview – hashdotdesign March 16, 2026 11:01 View deployment

vercel bot deployed to Preview – petrinaut March 16, 2026 11:02 View deployment

vercel bot deployed to Preview – hash March 16, 2026 11:11 View deployment

Update eslint npm packages

15b67a0

hash-worker bot force-pushed the deps/js/eslint-npm-packages branch from 54ad69f to 15b67a0 Compare March 16, 2026 15:36

vercel bot deployed to Preview – hashdotdesign-tokens March 16, 2026 15:38 View deployment

vercel bot deployed to Preview – hashdotdesign March 16, 2026 15:39 View deployment

vercel bot deployed to Preview – petrinaut March 16, 2026 15:40 View deployment

vercel bot deployed to Preview – hash March 16, 2026 15:49 View deployment

hash-worker bot assigned CiaranMn Mar 16, 2026

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Update `eslint` npm packages#8538

Update `eslint` npm packages#8538
hash-worker[bot] wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
deps/js/eslint-npm-packages

hash-worker bot commented Mar 13, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

vercel bot commented Mar 13, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

cursor bot commented Mar 13, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

augmentcode bot commented Mar 13, 2026

Uh oh!

augmentcode bot left a comment

Uh oh!

codspeed-hq bot commented Mar 13, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Mar 13, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Mar 16, 2026

@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!

1 participant

Conversation

hash-worker bot commented Mar 13, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Release Notes

Bug Fixes

Documentation

Chores

Configuration

Uh oh!

vercel bot commented Mar 13, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

cursor bot commented Mar 13, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

PR Summary

Uh oh!

augmentcode bot commented Mar 13, 2026

Uh oh!

augmentcode bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

codspeed-hq bot commented Mar 13, 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!

codecov bot commented Mar 13, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Mar 16, 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!

1 participant

hash-worker bot commented Mar 13, 2026 •

edited

Loading

vercel bot commented Mar 13, 2026 •

edited

Loading

cursor bot commented Mar 13, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codspeed-hq bot commented Mar 13, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Mar 13, 2026 •

edited

Loading