SRE-803: Retry "Launch external services" step in Tests workflow by claude[bot] · Pull Request #9016 · hashintel/hash

claude · 2026-07-13T11:45:57Z

Requested by Tim Diekmann · Slack thread

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

Before: a single transient BuildKit failure in the "Launch external services" step (e.g. target hydra: failed to receive status: rpc error: code = Unavailable desc = error reading from server: EOF) fails the whole integration job before any test runs — sibling jobs in the same run pass the identical step, so it's per-runner infrastructure noise.

After: the step retries up to 3 times (15s between attempts), so transient BuildKit failures are absorbed and only persistent failures fail the job.

How: in .github/workflows/test.yml, the docker compose --profile dev up -d invocation of the integration-tests job is wrapped in nick-fields/retry, using the same SHA-pinned version and style the repo already uses elsewhere (warm-up-repo, install-tools, deploy.yml, …). The two identical steps in .github/workflows/bench.yml get the same wrapping, since the same failure also fired on main in the Benches workflow.

🔗 Related links

🔍 What does this change?

Wraps the "Launch external services" step in nick-fields/retry (max_attempts: 3, retry_wait_seconds: 15, timeout_minutes: 15) — in test.yml, and in both copies of the identical step in bench.yml.
The action does not support working-directory, so the command cds into infra/compose itself (same pattern as deploy.yml).

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?

None — CI workflow change. YAML validated locally; the step is exercised by the Integration jobs on this very PR.

❓ How to test this?

Check the Integration jobs on this PR: the "Launch external services" step should pass (now running under the retry wrapper).

Generated by Claude Code

The docker compose up (buildx bake under the hood) can fail with transient BuildKit rpc errors on individual runners, failing the integration job before any test runs. Wrap the step in nick-fields/retry (3 attempts) to absorb the noise.

vercel · 2026-07-13T11:46:03Z

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

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
hash	Ready	Preview, Comment	Jul 13, 2026 12:06pm
hashdotdesign-tokens	Ready	Preview, Comment	Jul 13, 2026 12:06pm
petrinaut	Ready	Preview, Comment	Jul 13, 2026 12:06pm

codecov · 2026-07-13T11:50:24Z

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 59.73%. Comparing base (6736174) to head (37362b3).
⚠️ Report is 4 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #9016   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   59.73%   59.73%           
=======================================
  Files        1371     1371           
  Lines      135461   135461           
  Branches     6066     6066           
=======================================
+ Hits        80911    80913    +2     
+ Misses      53618    53616    -2     
  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	`96.23% <ø> (+0.03%)`	⬆️
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.

Apply the identical nick-fields/retry wrapping to the two "Launch external services" steps in the Benches workflow, which run the same docker compose command and hit the same transient BuildKit rpc errors (e.g. on main in run 29027294274). Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_019YPgwWiuoovZGU6iCazLPx

codspeed-hq · 2026-07-13T11:53:13Z

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 sre-803/retry-launch-external-services (37362b3) with main (469c489)}

cursor · 2026-07-13T12:10:29Z

PR Summary

Low Risk
CI-only workflow YAML; no application, auth, or deploy logic changes—only resilience for an existing docker compose step.

Overview
Launch external services in integration CI no longer runs docker compose as a single-shot step. It now uses the same SHA-pinned nick-fields/retry action already used for Playwright and warm-up elsewhere, with 3 attempts, 15s between retries, and a 15-minute timeout per attempt.

The change applies to test.yml (integration tests) and both matching steps in bench.yml (base and head integration bench jobs). Because the retry action has no working-directory, the command is cd infra/compose && docker compose --profile dev up -d, matching other workflows. Inline comments document transient BuildKit RPC failures (SRE-803).

^{Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 37362b3. Bugbot is set up for automated code reviews on this repo. Configure here.}

Copilot

Pull request overview

This PR improves CI resilience by retrying the “Launch external services” step in workflows where transient BuildKit/Buildx RPC failures on individual GitHub runners can fail jobs before any tests/benches run.

Changes:

Wraps docker compose --profile dev up -d in nick-fields/retry (3 attempts, 15s backoff, 15m timeout) in the Tests workflow.
Applies the same retry wrapper to both identical “Launch external services” steps in the Benches workflow.
Adjusts the command to cd infra/compose && ... since the retry action doesn’t support working-directory.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.

File	Description
.github/workflows/test.yml	Retries the integration job’s external-services bring-up to absorb transient BuildKit runner failures.
.github/workflows/bench.yml	Adds the same retry wrapper to both bench jobs’ external-services bring-up steps for consistency and stability.

github-actions · 2026-07-13T13:16:17Z

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	$$28.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 210 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.424 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.72 \mathrm{ms} \pm 22.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.88 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1002	$$13.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 115 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.193 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314	$$45.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 378 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.484 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$16.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 177 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}13.5 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1527	$$25.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 243 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.55 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078	$$30.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 228 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.82 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$4.09 \mathrm{ms} \pm 35.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.13 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033	$$15.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 121 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.21 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102	$$3.98 \mathrm{ms} \pm 41.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.03 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.13 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.80 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 52	$$3.50 \mathrm{ms} \pm 26.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.39 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269	$$5.51 \mathrm{ms} \pm 43.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.46 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.74 \mathrm{ms} \pm 35.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.02 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 108	$$4.41 \mathrm{ms} \pm 50.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.85 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133	$$4.71 \mathrm{ms} \pm 31.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.94 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.74 \mathrm{ms} \pm 27.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.84 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63	$$4.32 \mathrm{ms} \pm 34.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.95 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2	$$2.86 \mathrm{ms} \pm 23.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.79 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.58 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.50 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 2	$$2.74 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.42 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8	$$3.13 \mathrm{ms} \pm 22.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.81 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.82 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.87 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3	$$3.09 \mathrm{ms} \pm 22.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.96 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52	$$3.21 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.63 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.86 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.96 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 26	$$3.15 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.03 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94	$$3.70 \mathrm{ms} \pm 34.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.53 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.12 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.15 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 27	$$3.48 \mathrm{ms} \pm 26.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.13 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66	$$3.56 \mathrm{ms} \pm 25.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.38 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.14 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.59 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29	$$3.46 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.935 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth	1 entities	$$45.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 280 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.59 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	10 entities	$$33.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 204 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.216 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	25 entities	$$37.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 279 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.70 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	5 entities	$$33.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 192 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-23.490 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	50 entities	$$45.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 243 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.84 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	1 entities	$$51.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 357 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.744 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	10 entities	$$41.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 193 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.52 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	25 entities	$$96.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 567 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.36 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	5 entities	$$35.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 233 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.51 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	50 entities	$$265 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.09 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.519 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	1 entities	$$11.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 69.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.84 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	10 entities	$$10.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 58.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.213 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	25 entities	$$11.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 73.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.75 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	5 entities	$$11.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 77.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.135 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	50 entities	$$10.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 62.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.412 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$10.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 67.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.59 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$11.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 68.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.01 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	100 entities	$$11.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 67.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.44 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	1000 entities	$$11.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 75.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.97 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10000 entities	$$11.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 76.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.45 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	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`	$$11.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 81.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.13 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1`	$$11.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 68.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.02 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1`	$$11.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 74.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.61 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1`	$$11.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 85.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.735 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2`	$$12.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 69.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.68 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1`	$$11.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 82.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.57 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1`	$$11.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 51.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.45 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1`	$$12.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 71.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}11.2 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1`	$$11.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 78.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.87 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id	Account ID: `bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba`	$$9.50 \mathrm{ms} \pm 82.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.51 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$65.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 441 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.08 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$124 \mathrm{ms} \pm 735 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.88 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$71.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 476 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.02 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$84.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 491 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.37 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$95.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 557 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.40 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$101 \mathrm{ms} \pm 537 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.68 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$48.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 274 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.11 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$82.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 544 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.78 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$56.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 448 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.26 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$68.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 630 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}12.1 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$69.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 499 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.72 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$70.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 589 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}9.93 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
full_test	query-limited	$$127 \mathrm{ms} \pm 762 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.50 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
full_test	query-unlimited	$$136 \mathrm{ms} \pm 678 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.282 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-limited	$$18.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 157 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.583 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-unlimited	$$523 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.41 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}-2.026 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

claude Bot assigned TimDiekmann Jul 13, 2026

github-actions Bot added the area/infra Relates to version control, CI, CD or IaC (area) label Jul 13, 2026

vercel Bot deployed to Preview – hashdotdesign-tokens July 13, 2026 11:47 View deployment

vercel Bot deployed to Preview – petrinaut July 13, 2026 11:50 View deployment

vercel Bot deployed to Preview – hashdotdesign-tokens July 13, 2026 11:53 View deployment

vercel Bot deployed to Preview – petrinaut July 13, 2026 11:57 View deployment

vercel Bot deployed to Preview – hash July 13, 2026 12:06 View deployment

TimDiekmann approved these changes Jul 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

TimDiekmann marked this pull request as ready for review July 13, 2026 12:10

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings July 13, 2026 12:10

TimDiekmann enabled auto-merge July 13, 2026 12:10

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of TimDiekmann July 13, 2026 12:10 View session

Copilot AI reviewed Jul 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

TimDiekmann added this pull request to the merge queue Jul 13, 2026

Merged via the queue into main with commit b6fb59e Jul 13, 2026
186 checks passed

TimDiekmann deleted the sre-803/retry-launch-external-services branch July 13, 2026 12:36

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Uh oh!

SRE-803: Retry "Launch external services" step in Tests workflow#9016

SRE-803: Retry "Launch external services" step in Tests workflow#9016
TimDiekmann merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
sre-803/retry-launch-external-services

claude Bot commented Jul 13, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

vercel Bot commented Jul 13, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented Jul 13, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

codspeed-hq Bot commented Jul 13, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

cursor Bot commented Jul 13, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Jul 13, 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!

3 participants

Uh oh!

Conversation

claude Bot commented Jul 13, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

🔗 Related links

🔍 What does this change?

Pre-Merge Checklist 🚀

🚢 Has this modified a publishable library?

📜 Does this require a change to the docs?

🕸️ Does this require a change to the Turbo Graph?

🛡 What tests cover this?

❓ How to test this?

Uh oh!

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

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

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

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

codspeed-hq Bot commented Jul 13, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Merging this PR will degrade performance by 15.38%

Performance Changes

Uh oh!

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

Uh oh!

PR Summary

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Reviewed changes

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Jul 13, 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!

3 participants

claude Bot commented Jul 13, 2026 •

edited

Loading

vercel Bot commented Jul 13, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov Bot commented Jul 13, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codspeed-hq Bot commented Jul 13, 2026 •

edited

Loading

cursor Bot commented Jul 13, 2026 •

edited

Loading