BE-781: hgraph: Entity event feed with deletion tombstones

[indietyp]

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

Entities gain deletion tombstones and an event feed. A deletion now writes who deleted and when (transaction and decision time) into entity_ids, with a check constraint holding the tombstone total or absent. The new feed module serves ordered change events polled from current rows in two arms: changed for present rows and ended for decision-closed ones. Consumers that mirror entity state can now hear about deletions, which the store previously forgot.

The migrations pair as in #9302: V59 (deletion provenance columns), V60 (feed indexes), and V61 (feed statistics) alter deployed databases, and the same schema enters the fresh-database v009 here. The V60/V61 objects exist because the feed's predicates are expressions, which carry no column statistics. The migration comments state what each object fixes and the measured plan bounds.

Review focus: feed completeness at the poll-window edges (an event exactly on a boundary) and across the split between the two arms. The tests/deletion suite exercises the crossings.

🔍 What does this change?

• graph-migrations/v009__entities/up.sql: tombstone columns with their totality constraint and partial index, plus the feed indexes and extended statistics.
• postgres_migrations/V59, V60, V61: the same schema for deployed databases.
• knowledge/entity/feed.rs: the feed. snapshot/entity/channel.rs carries the deletion fields through snapshots.
• delete.rs: tombstone writes. provenance.rs: the deletion provenance column.
• rows.rs, table.rs, insert.rs: the Deleted* row vocabulary and fixtures.
• Cargo.toml: pin-project-lite for the feed stream plumbing.
• tests/deletion/: a new integration suite (drafts, erase, feed, links, purge).

Pre-Merge Checklist 🚀

🚢 Has this modified a publishable library?

This PR:

• does not modify any publishable blocks or libraries, or modifications do not need publishing

📜 Does this require a change to the docs?

The changes in this PR:

• are internal and do not require a docs change

🕸️ Does this require a change to the Turbo Graph?

The changes in this PR:

• do not affect the execution graph

🛡 What tests cover this?

• tests/deletion/ under the integration harness, which provisions its own scratch database.
• The existing postgres-store lib suite covers this, plus the workspace battery: cargo check including all test targets, clippy at zero warnings, fmt clean.

❓ How to test this?

cargo nextest run -p hash-graph-postgres-store --lib
turbo run test:integration --filter @rust/hash-graph-postgres-store

[vercel]

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

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
hash	Ready	Preview	Aug 27, 2026 3:27pm
petrinaut	Ready	Preview	Aug 27, 2026 3:27pm
petrinaut-docs	Ready	Preview	Aug 27, 2026 3:27pm

1 Skipped Deployment

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
hashdotdesign-tokens	Ignored	Preview	Aug 27, 2026 3:27pm

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 15.92920% with 95 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 60.76%. Comparing base (5793745) to head (1fedd7e).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...-store/src/store/postgres/knowledge/entity/feed.rs	0.00%	63 Missing ⚠️
...raph/postgres-store/src/snapshot/entity/channel.rs	0.00%	12 Missing ⚠️
...tore/src/store/postgres/knowledge/entity/delete.rs	0.00%	8 Missing ⚠️
...ph/postgres-store/src/store/postgres/query/rows.rs	66.66%	6 Missing ⚠️
...store/src/store/postgres/knowledge/entity/query.rs	0.00%	3 Missing ⚠️
.../src/store/postgres/knowledge/entity/provenance.rs	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️
...h/postgres-store/src/store/postgres/query/table.rs	85.71%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@                                          Coverage Diff                                          @@
##           bm/be-780-record-which-property-produced-each-cached-entity-label    #9303      +/-   ##
=====================================================================================================
- Coverage                                                              60.79%   60.76%   -0.04%     
=====================================================================================================
  Files                                                                   1440     1441       +1     
  Lines                                                                 143491   143588      +97     
  Branches                                                                6662     6662              
=====================================================================================================
+ Hits                                                                   87231    87246      +15     
- Misses                                                                 55169    55251      +82     
  Partials                                                                1091     1091              

Flag	Coverage Δ
apps.hash-ai-worker-ts	1.99% <ø> (ø)
apps.hash-api	14.68% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-backend-utils	3.27% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-graph-sdk	10.02% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-isomorphic-utils	12.22% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-api	24.95% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-postgres-store	32.02% <15.92%> (-0.08%)	⬇️
rust.hashql-compiletest	28.39% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-eval	79.82% <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]

Merging this PR will degrade performance by 15.38%

❌ 2 regressed benchmarks
✅ 96 untouched benchmarks

Warning

Please fix the performance issues or acknowledge them on CodSpeed.

Performance Changes

	Benchmark	BASE	HEAD	Efficiency
❌	bit_matrix/dense/iter_row[64]	140.8 ns	170 ns	-17.16%
❌	bit_matrix/dense/iter_row[200]	185.8 ns	215 ns	-13.57%

Tip

Investigate this regression by commenting @codspeedbot fix this regression on this PR, or directly use the CodSpeed MCP with your agent.

---

_{Comparing bm/be-781-entity-event-feed-with-deletion-tombstones (1fedd7e) with main (57396c9)¹}

Footnotes

1. No successful run was found on bm/be-780-record-which-property-produced-each-cached-entity-label (5793745) during the generation of this report, so main (57396c9) was used instead as the comparison base. There might be some changes unrelated to this pull request in this report. ↩

[cursor]

PR Summary

Medium Risk
Touches core entity storage, purge semantics, and a new consumer-facing poll API with documented watermark/lag and erase/restore edge cases; migrations backfill live tombstones from JSONB.

Overview
Adds a transaction-time watermark feed (PostgresStore::entity_events_since) so consumers can mirror published entity state: Updated (present-row changes), Ended (present closed with no successor, e.g. archived incoming links on purge), and Deleted (purge tombstones). One SQL snapshot unions the three arms; partial indexes and extended statistics target the feed predicates.

Purge deletions no longer stash deletion provenance in entity_ids.provenance JSONB. They write deleted_by_id / deleted_at_transaction_time / deleted_at_decision_time with an all-or-nothing CHECK and a partial index on deletion time. V59 backfills and strips legacy JSON keys; V60/V61 add feed indexes and planner stats; fresh installs get the same in v009. Row types, bulk insert, snapshot restore, and update_entity_ids_provenance follow the column layout; deletion timestamps are truncated to whole seconds.

New tests/deletion/feed (plus tombstone/provenance test updates) cover feed dispatch, strict watermark boundaries, and erase vs purge behavior.

^{Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 1fedd7e. Bugbot is set up for automated code reviews on this repo. Configure here.}

The merge-base changed after approval.

[cursor]

Cursor Bugbot has reviewed your changes and found 1 potential issue.

^{❌ Bugbot Autofix is OFF. To automatically fix reported issues with cloud agents, enable autofix in the Cursor dashboard.}

^{Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit da89aa0. Configure here.}

[github-actions]

Benchmark results

@rust/hash-graph-benches – Integrations

policy_resolution_large

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2002	$$25.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 183 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.559 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.52 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.373 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1002	$$12.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 125 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.855 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314	$$42.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 433 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.566 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$15.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 167 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.228 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1527	$$23.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 198 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-9.213 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078	$$26.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 161 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.458 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.90 \mathrm{ms} \pm 27.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.395 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033	$$13.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 120 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-9.470 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102	$$3.81 \mathrm{ms} \pm 26.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.957 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.08 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.034 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 52	$$3.44 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.706 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269	$$5.24 \mathrm{ms} \pm 35.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.336 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.70 \mathrm{ms} \pm 28.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.931 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 108	$$4.40 \mathrm{ms} \pm 32.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.62 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133	$$4.44 \mathrm{ms} \pm 32.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.413 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.58 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.727 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63	$$4.20 \mathrm{ms} \pm 34.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.691 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2	$$2.80 \mathrm{ms} \pm 26.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.79 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.58 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.775 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 2	$$2.74 \mathrm{ms} \pm 22.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.291 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8	$$2.97 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.336 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.79 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.243 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3	$$2.94 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.665 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52	$$3.11 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.617 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.86 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.83 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 26	$$3.15 \mathrm{ms} \pm 25.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.15 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94	$$3.50 \mathrm{ms} \pm 25.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.149 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.06 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.477 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 27	$$3.39 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.553 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66	$$3.41 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.476 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.07 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.258 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29	$$3.42 \mathrm{ms} \pm 25.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.131 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth	1 entities	$$43.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 217 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.73 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	10 entities	$$33.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 210 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.980 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	25 entities	$$36.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 260 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.200 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	5 entities	$$39.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.26 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}4.08 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	50 entities	$$44.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 375 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.94 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	1 entities	$$51.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 317 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.64 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	10 entities	$$43.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 278 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.98 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	25 entities	$$90.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 563 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.848 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	5 entities	$$34.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 220 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.621 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	50 entities	$$282 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.12 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{red}6.04 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	1 entities	$$11.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 70.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.14 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	10 entities	$$11.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 74.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.80 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	25 entities	$$11.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 74.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.198 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	5 entities	$$10.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 68.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.668 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	50 entities	$$11.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 63.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.036 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$11.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 56.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.43 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$11.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 89.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.393 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	100 entities	$$10.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 65.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-7.604 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	1000 entities	$$11.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 70.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.20 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10000 entities	$$11.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 69.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.89 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	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	$$11.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 91.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.44 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1	$$12.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 103 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}10.5 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1	$$11.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 76.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.92 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1	$$11.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 79.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.61 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2	$$12.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 106 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.28 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1	$$11.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 70.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.21 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1	$$12.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 82.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.27 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1	$$11.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 97.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.30 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1	$$11.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 81.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}10.1 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id	Account ID: bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba	$$8.72 \mathrm{ms} \pm 59.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.75 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$61.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 567 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}11.0 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$119 \mathrm{ms} \pm 752 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}11.1 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$68.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 538 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.98 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$77.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 566 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.84 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$88.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 700 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.00 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$94.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 639 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.22 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$45.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 239 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.89 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$76.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 364 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.57 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$52.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 517 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.69 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$63.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 528 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}9.53 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$70.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 538 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}18.1 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$66.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 349 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}12.4 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
full_test	query-limited	$$126 \mathrm{ms} \pm 591 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.515 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
full_test	query-unlimited	$$138 \mathrm{ms} \pm 462 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.706 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-limited	$$17.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 117 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.761 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-unlimited	$$543 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.02 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}2.85 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph