BE-582: HashQL: Change opaque types from invariant to covariant by indietyp · Pull Request #8835 · hashintel/hash

indietyp · 2026-06-08T11:41:41Z

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

Opaque types in HashQL were previously treated as invariant in their inner representation. This was overly restrictive: because HashQL values are immutable, there is no mutation-based unsoundness argument that would require invariance. This PR changes opaque types to be covariant, meaning W<A> <: W<B> whenever A <: B, while still preserving nominal separation between distinct opaque families.

This fixes a regression where expressions like W(A()) as W<A | B> would fail to type-check, because the solver could not propagate constraints through the opaque wrapper when the target type was a union. With covariance, the solver correctly decomposes W<?1> <: W<A | B> into ?1 <: A | B, and combined with the lower bound A <: ?1, resolves ?1 = A.

The is_top implementation for opaque types is also corrected: W<Unknown> is the top of the W fiber only, not the global top. Returning true previously caused T | W<Unknown> to incorrectly collapse to Unknown, destroying nominal separation between opaque families.

As a consequence of covariance, inference constraints that previously generated Equals/Unify constraints now generate LowerBound/UpperBound/Ordering constraints, and the meet operation for same-name concrete opaques now correctly computes the meet of their inner representations rather than requiring identical representations.

The snapshot test outputs for HIR lowering are updated to reflect that inference variables inside opaque wrappers now display with their opaque wrapper (e.g. ::graph::types::knowledge::entity::PropertyProvenance(?) instead of bare ?), which is a direct consequence of the solver now propagating through the opaque boundary.

🔍 What does this change?

Changed OpaqueType::is_subtype_of to use Variance::Covariant instead of Variance::Invariant.
Changed OpaqueType::collect_constraints to emit covariant constraints instead of invariant ones.
Fixed OpaqueType::is_top to always return false, since an opaque type is never the global top regardless of its inner representation.
Rewrote OpaqueType::meet to handle the concrete same-name case by computing the full lattice meet of the inner representations, rather than requiring structural equality.
Added a regression test opaque_covariant_subtype_through_union covering the W(A()) as W<A | B> pattern.
Added a unit test is_not_top verifying that W<Unknown> is not the global top.
Updated existing opaque type tests to reflect the new covariant constraint shapes (LowerBound/UpperBound/Ordering instead of Equals/Unify).
Updated HIR lowering snapshot outputs to reflect that inference variables inside opaque wrappers are now displayed with their nominal wrapper.
Updated the OpaqueType doc comment with a formal denotational semantics model justifying covariance.

🛡 What tests cover this?

New regression test opaque_covariant_subtype_through_union in the inference solver test suite.
New unit test is_not_top in the opaque type test suite.
Updated existing opaque type lattice and inference constraint tests.
Updated HIR lowering UI snapshot tests.

❓ How to test this?

Run cargo test in libs/@local/hashql/core.
Run the HIR lowering UI tests in libs/@local/hashql/hir.
Confirm all tests pass and snapshot outputs match.

chore: add new dependency chore: format feat: error module feat: introduce hashql_eval interner chore: checkpoint feat: checkpoint feat: checkpoint chore: remove old value module feat: checkpoint feat: checkpoint feat: checkpoint feat: checkpoint feat: checkpoint chore: checkpoint feat: move entity query into its own modul fix: query request feat: checkpoint (it compiles!) feat: checkpoint feat: checkpoint feat: checkpoint fix: issue around cached thunking feat: covariance for opaque inners fix: cfgattr serde chore: remove graph module

cursor · 2026-06-08T11:41:49Z

PR Summary

High Risk
Core type-system semantics for all opaque types change (subtyping, meet, inference, top), with broad test/snapshot fallout across HashQL checking.

Overview
HashQL opaque (nominal) types are now covariant in their inner type: same-name W<A> <: W<B> when A <: B, while different opaque names stay unrelated. Subtype checking, inference constraint collection, and docs move from invariant to covariant semantics (justified by immutable values).

is_top for opaques always returns false so W<Unknown> is only the top of that opaque family, not the global top—avoiding T | W<Unknown> collapsing to Unknown.

meet for same-name concrete opaques now meets inner representations through the lattice (e.g. W<Number> & W<Number|String> → W<Number>) instead of requiring identical reps or yielding empty.

Tests add opaque_covariant_subtype_through_union (W(A()) as W<A|B> resolves the hole to A) and is_not_top; opaque tests expect ordering / bound constraints instead of unify / equals. HIR UI snapshots show inference holes inside opaque wrappers with full nominal paths (e.g. PropertyProvenance(?)).

Minor: #[inline] on a few Default impls; clippy allow in solver tests.

^{Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit f4fbb1d. Bugbot is set up for automated code reviews on this repo. Configure here.}

vercel · 2026-06-08T11:41:51Z

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

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
hash	Ready	Preview, Comment	Jun 9, 2026 7:28am
petrinaut	Ready	Preview	Jun 9, 2026 7:28am

1 Skipped Deployment

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
hashdotdesign-tokens	Ignored	Preview	Jun 9, 2026 7:28am

indietyp · 2026-06-08T11:41:55Z

BE-537: hgraph: REST /hashql endpoint with E2E tests #8827
BE-592: HashQL: Remove old eval graph path and core value types #8841
BE-590: hgraph: Refactor entity query handlers into entity/query submodule #8840
BE-587, BE-588: HashQL: Introduce CodeGenerationContext/CodeExecutionContext split and eval-stage Interner #8839
BE-581, BE-589: HashQL: Introduce pass::lower/pass::place pipeline facades and fix cached constructor closure bug #8838
BE-585, BE-591: HashQL: Add MIR interpreter test suite and refactor diagnostic categories #8837
BE-583, BE-584, BE-586: HashQL: Add HeapPool, improve spans, and propagate Critical severity through diagnostics #8836
BE-582: HashQL: Change opaque types from invariant to covariant #8835 👈 (View in Graphite)
main

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

codecov · 2026-06-08T11:45:31Z

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 89.47368% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 59.16%. Comparing base (f2b4309) to head (f4fbb1d).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
libs/@local/hashql/core/src/type/kind/opaque.rs	89.47%	1 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #8835      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   59.13%   59.16%   +0.02%     
==========================================
  Files        1346     1346              
  Lines      130077   130035      -42     
  Branches     5883     5884       +1     
==========================================
+ Hits        76923    76931       +8     
+ Misses      52248    52199      -49     
+ Partials      906      905       -1

Flag	Coverage Δ
apps.hash-ai-worker-ts	`1.39% <ø> (ø)`
apps.hash-api	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
local.hash-backend-utils	`2.81% <ø> (ø)`
local.hash-graph-sdk	`9.63% <ø> (ø)`
local.hash-isomorphic-utils	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hash-graph-api	`2.51% <ø> (-0.01%)`	⬇️
rust.hashql-ast	`87.23% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hashql-compiletest	`28.26% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hashql-core	`79.42% <89.47%> (+0.13%)`	⬆️
rust.hashql-eval	`75.69% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hashql-hir	`89.06% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hashql-mir	`87.05% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hashql-syntax-jexpr	`94.06% <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.

Copilot

Pull request overview

This PR updates HashQL’s type system so opaque types are treated as covariant in their inner representation (while remaining nominally distinct by opaque “family” name). It also fixes an incorrect “top” classification that could collapse unions across opaque boundaries, and updates solver/HIR snapshots and tests to reflect the new behavior.

Changes:

Make opaque subtyping/constraint collection covariant (propagate constraints through the opaque wrapper).
Fix OpaqueType::is_top so W<Unknown> is not considered the global top type, preserving nominal separation in unions.
Update lattice behavior/tests (notably meet for same-name concrete opaques) and refresh HIR lowering UI snapshots to reflect wrapped inference variables.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 13 out of 13 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.

Show a summary per file

File	Description
libs/@local/hashql/hir/tests/ui/lower/specialization/filter-graph.stdout	Updates expected HIR output to show inference variables wrapped by their opaque type.
libs/@local/hashql/hir/tests/ui/lower/specialization/collect-filter-graph.stdout	Updates expected HIR output consistent with covariant opaque display changes.
libs/@local/hashql/hir/tests/ui/lower/specialization/collect-custom-collect.stderr	Updates expected diagnostic rendering to include opaque wrappers around inference vars.
libs/@local/hashql/hir/tests/ui/lower/checking/minimal-graph.stdout	Refreshes UI snapshot output for wrapped inference variables in minimal graph checking.
libs/@local/hashql/hir/tests/ui/lower/checking/filter-graph.stdout	Refreshes UI snapshot output for wrapped inference variables in graph checking.
libs/@local/hashql/hir/tests/ui/lower/checking/collect-filter-graph.stdout	Refreshes UI snapshot output for wrapped inference variables in collect+checking path.
libs/@local/hashql/core/src/type/visit.rs	Adds `#[inline]` to `Default` impl for `RecursiveVisitorGuard`.
libs/@local/hashql/core/src/type/recursion.rs	Adds `#[inline]` to `Default` impl for `RecursionBoundary`.
libs/@local/hashql/core/src/type/kind/tests/opaque.rs	Updates and adds tests covering covariance, `is_top` behavior, and new constraint shapes.
libs/@local/hashql/core/src/type/kind/opaque.rs	Implements covariant opaque subtype/constraints, corrects `is_top`, and updates `meet` semantics + docs.
libs/@local/hashql/core/src/type/inference/solver/tests.rs	Adds regression test for covariant opaque subtyping through unions; adds a module-level clippy expectation.
libs/@local/hashql/core/src/type/inference/solver/mod.rs	Adds `#[inline]` to `Default` impl for `VariableConstraintSatisfiability`.
libs/@local/hashql/core/src/type/inference/solver/graph.rs	Adds `#[inline]` to `Default` impl for `Edges`.

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

codspeed-hq · 2026-06-08T11:47:59Z

Merging this PR will improve performance by 19.34%

⚠️

Different runtime environments detected

Some benchmarks with significant performance changes were compared across different runtime environments,
which may affect the accuracy of the results.

Open the report in CodSpeed to investigate

⚡ 1 improved benchmark
✅ 79 untouched benchmarks

Performance Changes

	Benchmark	`BASE`	`HEAD`	Efficiency
⚡	`pattern_match_constant`	180 ns	150.8 ns	+19.34%

Tip

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

_{Comparing bm/be-582-hashql-make-opaque-types-covariant-in-their-inner (f4fbb1d) with main (232b539)}

github-actions · 2026-06-09T08:40:38Z

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	$$28.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 203 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.53 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.43 \mathrm{ms} \pm 25.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.762 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1001	$$13.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 117 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.49 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314	$$44.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 365 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.91 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$14.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 108 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.691 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1526	$$24.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 189 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.07 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078	$$29.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 172 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.31 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.80 \mathrm{ms} \pm 26.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.210 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033	$$14.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 122 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.13 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102	$$3.86 \mathrm{ms} \pm 23.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.67 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.01 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.34 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 51	$$3.42 \mathrm{ms} \pm 25.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.65 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269	$$5.26 \mathrm{ms} \pm 29.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.88 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.58 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.75 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 107	$$4.20 \mathrm{ms} \pm 29.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.14 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133	$$4.47 \mathrm{ms} \pm 31.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.01 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.51 \mathrm{ms} \pm 26.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.254 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63	$$4.12 \mathrm{ms} \pm 29.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.684 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2	$$2.61 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.114 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.49 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.366 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1	$$2.59 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.31 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8	$$2.88 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.22 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.68 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.03 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3	$$2.83 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.762 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52	$$3.05 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.17 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.76 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.225 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 25	$$2.99 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.504 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94	$$3.46 \mathrm{ms} \pm 25.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.35 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.96 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.542 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 26	$$3.30 \mathrm{ms} \pm 24.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.440 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66	$$3.33 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.371 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.94 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.01 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29	$$3.35 \mathrm{ms} \pm 25.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.18 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth	1 entities	$$55.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 419 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.84 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	10 entities	$$46.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 224 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.671 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	25 entities	$$50.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 258 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.478 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	5 entities	$$57.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.37 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{red}28.0 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	50 entities	$$63.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 444 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.706 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	1 entities	$$62.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 338 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.422 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	10 entities	$$56.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 437 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.632 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	25 entities	$$105 \mathrm{ms} \pm 601 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.608 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	5 entities	$$51.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 2.38 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{red}9.21 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	50 entities	$$296 \mathrm{ms} \pm 962 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-8.304 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	1 entities	$$19.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 119 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.468 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	10 entities	$$20.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 126 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.930 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	25 entities	$$20.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 129 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.098 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	5 entities	$$19.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 144 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.197 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	50 entities	$$25.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 154 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.070 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$19.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 126 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.33 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$19.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 93.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.079 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	100 entities	$$19.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 144 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.10 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	1000 entities	$$21.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 126 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.19 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10000 entities	$$27.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 211 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.90 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	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`	$$36.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 298 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.245 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1`	$$35.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 350 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.15 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1`	$$36.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 369 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.015 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1`	$$35.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 294 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.25 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2`	$$36.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 344 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.78 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1`	$$35.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 340 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.299 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1`	$$36.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 348 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.536 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1`	$$35.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 382 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.00 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1`	$$36.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 314 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.39 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id	Account ID: `bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba`	$$8.73 \mathrm{ms} \pm 45.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.188 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$95.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 563 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.05 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$151 \mathrm{ms} \pm 771 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.188 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$102 \mathrm{ms} \pm 719 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.76 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$112 \mathrm{ms} \pm 618 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.181 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$119 \mathrm{ms} \pm 686 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.321 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$128 \mathrm{ms} \pm 748 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.037 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$105 \mathrm{ms} \pm 632 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.10 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$135 \mathrm{ms} \pm 804 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.21 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$113 \mathrm{ms} \pm 736 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.93 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$121 \mathrm{ms} \pm 585 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.753 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$123 \mathrm{ms} \pm 566 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.575 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$125 \mathrm{ms} \pm 750 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.93 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
full_test	query-limited	$$166 \mathrm{ms} \pm 2.71 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{red}12.8 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
full_test	query-unlimited	$$154 \mathrm{ms} \pm 787 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.912 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-limited	$$39.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 282 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.181 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-unlimited	$$575 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.62 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}2.54 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

indietyp added 2 commits June 8, 2026 11:34

chore: update snapshots

f4fbb1d

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings June 8, 2026 11:41

graphite-app Bot assigned indietyp Jun 8, 2026

github-actions Bot added 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 Jun 8, 2026

vercel Bot temporarily deployed to Preview – petrinaut June 8, 2026 11:41 Inactive

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of indietyp June 8, 2026 11:41 View session

Copilot AI reviewed Jun 8, 2026

View reviewed changes

vercel Bot deployed to Preview – hash June 8, 2026 11:50 View deployment

indietyp force-pushed the bm/be-582-hashql-make-opaque-types-covariant-in-their-inner branch from fc41426 to f4fbb1d Compare June 9, 2026 07:17

vercel Bot deployed to Preview – petrinaut June 9, 2026 07:21 View deployment

vercel Bot deployed to Preview – hash June 9, 2026 07:28 View deployment

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

BE-582: HashQL: Change opaque types from invariant to covariant#8835

BE-582: HashQL: Change opaque types from invariant to covariant#8835
indietyp wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
bm/be-582-hashql-make-opaque-types-covariant-in-their-inner

indietyp commented Jun 8, 2026

Uh oh!

cursor Bot commented Jun 8, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

vercel Bot commented Jun 8, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

indietyp commented Jun 8, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented Jun 8, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Uh oh!

codspeed-hq Bot commented Jun 8, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Jun 9, 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!

2 participants

Conversation

indietyp commented Jun 8, 2026

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

🔍 What does this change?

🛡 What tests cover this?

❓ How to test this?

Uh oh!

cursor Bot commented Jun 8, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

PR Summary

Uh oh!

vercel Bot commented Jun 8, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

indietyp commented Jun 8, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented Jun 8, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Reviewed changes

Uh oh!

codspeed-hq Bot commented Jun 8, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Merging this PR will improve performance by 19.34%

Performance Changes

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Jun 9, 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

cursor Bot commented Jun 8, 2026 •

edited

Loading

vercel Bot commented Jun 8, 2026 •

edited

Loading

indietyp commented Jun 8, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov Bot commented Jun 8, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codspeed-hq Bot commented Jun 8, 2026 •

edited

Loading