Update Rust crate aws-sdk-s3 to v1.127.0

[hash-worker]

This PR contains the following updates:

Package	Type	Update	Change
aws-sdk-s3	workspace.dependencies	minor	1.125.0 -> 1.127.0

---

Warning

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

---

Configuration

📅 Schedule: Branch creation - "before 4am every weekday,every weekend" (UTC), Automerge - "before 4am every weekday,every weekend" (UTC).

🚦 Automerge: Enabled.

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

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

---

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

---

This PR has been generated by Renovate Bot.

[cursor]

PR Summary

Medium Risk
Dependency-only change that updates aws-sdk-s3 and re-resolves transitive crates (notably socket2, windows-sys, and getrandom), which could affect build/runtime behavior across platforms. Risk is moderate due to the amount of lockfile churn despite no source changes.

Overview
Updates Rust dependencies by bumping aws-sdk-s3 to 1.127.0 (and aws-smithy-types to 1.4.7) and regenerating Cargo.lock.

The lockfile re-resolution also changes several transitive versions (including downgrades of socket2, windows-sys, getrandom, and a syn v1 usage in data-encoding-macro-internal), which may impact platform-specific builds (especially Windows) and networking-related behavior.

^{Written by Cursor Bugbot for commit c097cb2. This will update automatically on new commits. Configure here.}

[vercel]

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

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
hash	Ready	Preview, Comment	Mar 17, 2026 8:16pm
hashdotdesign	Ready	Preview, Comment	Mar 17, 2026 8:16pm
hashdotdesign-tokens	Ready	Preview, Comment	Mar 17, 2026 8:16pm
petrinaut	Ready	Preview, Comment	Mar 17, 2026 8:16pm

[augmentcode]

🤖 Augment PR Summary

Summary: This Renovate PR updates the aws-sdk-rust/smithy-rs dependency set used by the workspace.

Changes:

• Bumped aws-config from 1.8.14 to 1.8.15 (patch)
• Bumped aws-sdk-s3 from 1.124.0 to 1.125.0 (minor)
• Bumped aws-types from 1.3.13 to 1.3.14 (patch)

Technical Notes: The only repo change in this PR is to Cargo.lock, reflecting the updated dependency resolution.

_{🤖 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.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 62.49%. Comparing base (e0e4091) to head (c097cb2).
⚠️ Report is 5 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #8522      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   62.60%   62.49%   -0.11%     
==========================================
  Files        1317     1318       +1     
  Lines      133977   134211     +234     
  Branches     5517     5517              
==========================================
- Hits        83877    83876       -1     
- Misses      49185    49420     +235     
  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	96.14% <ø> (-0.02%)	⬇️
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	2.52% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-authorization	62.34% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-postgres-store	26.39% <ø> (-0.34%)	⬇️
rust.hash-graph-store	37.76% <ø> (-0.13%)	⬇️
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.

[codspeed-hq]

Merging this PR will not alter performance

✅ 80 untouched benchmarks

---

_{Comparing deps/rs/aws-sdk-rust-monorepo (c097cb2) with main (9cf2392)¹}

Footnotes

1. No successful run was found on main (feb318b) during the generation of this report, so 9cf2392 was used instead as the comparison base. There might be some changes unrelated to this pull request in this report. ↩

[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.}

[cursor]

Cargo.lock resolves wrong aws-sdk-s3 version

Medium Severity

The PR title and description state this update targets aws-sdk-s3 1.126.0, but the Cargo.lock actually resolves to 1.127.0. The committed lockfile skips the intended version entirely. This likely happened because 1.127.0 was published between when Renovate generated the PR and when the lockfile was regenerated, causing a silent version drift. The actual installed version is different from what was reviewed and approved.

 

[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	$$27.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 145 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.036 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.55 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.927 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1001	$$13.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 80.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.805 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314	$$43.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 305 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.502 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$15.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 127 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.758 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1526	$$24.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 171 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.567 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078	$$28.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 218 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.755 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.89 \mathrm{ms} \pm 23.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.690 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033	$$14.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 120 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.228 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102	$$3.93 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.259 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.10 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.456 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 51	$$3.49 \mathrm{ms} \pm 23.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.933 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269	$$5.34 \mathrm{ms} \pm 25.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.475 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.71 \mathrm{ms} \pm 24.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.191 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 107	$$4.28 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.532 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133	$$4.59 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.046 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.56 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.052 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63	$$4.24 \mathrm{ms} \pm 22.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.545 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2	$$2.85 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.147 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.81 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.249 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1	$$2.91 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.897 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8	$$3.17 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.954 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.98 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.073 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3	$$3.29 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.314 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52	$$3.21 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.380 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.94 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.004 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 25	$$3.06 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.875 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94	$$3.64 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.596 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.21 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.134 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 26	$$3.42 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.457 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66	$$3.59 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.877 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.19 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.336 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29	$$3.47 \mathrm{ms} \pm 22.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.231 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth	1 entities	$$45.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 224 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.320 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	10 entities	$$83.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 333 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.097 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	25 entities	$$51.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 326 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.89 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	5 entities	$$53.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 323 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.340 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	50 entities	$$62.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 346 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.64 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	1 entities	$$46.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 177 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.389 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	10 entities	$$423 \mathrm{ms} \pm 875 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.446 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	25 entities	$$103 \mathrm{ms} \pm 569 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.12 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	5 entities	$$91.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 395 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.915 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	50 entities	$$292 \mathrm{ms} \pm 912 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.228 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	1 entities	$$21.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 132 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.77 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	10 entities	$$20.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 98.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.05 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	25 entities	$$20.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 94.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.547 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	5 entities	$$20.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 116 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.30 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	50 entities	$$24.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 118 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.321 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$19.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 112 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.879 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$19.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 106 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.121 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	100 entities	$$19.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 95.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.140 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	1000 entities	$$20.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 119 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.021 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10000 entities	$$26.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 202 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.113 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	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	$$34.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 303 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.789 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1	$$35.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 328 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.826 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1	$$34.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 272 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.024 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1	$$35.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 331 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.056 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2	$$33.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 268 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.365 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1	$$34.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 306 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.422 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1	$$34.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 345 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.586 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1	$$34.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 284 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.472 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1	$$34.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 284 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.309 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id	Account ID: bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba	$$8.82 \mathrm{ms} \pm 64.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-7.823 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$91.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 504 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.150 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$145 \mathrm{ms} \pm 524 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.433 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$98.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 391 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.827 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$108 \mathrm{ms} \pm 503 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.943 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$116 \mathrm{ms} \pm 491 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.203 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$124 \mathrm{ms} \pm 566 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.049 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$100 \mathrm{ms} \pm 414 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.158 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$129 \mathrm{ms} \pm 485 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.853 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$107 \mathrm{ms} \pm 443 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.569 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$116 \mathrm{ms} \pm 576 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.836 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$118 \mathrm{ms} \pm 521 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.037 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$118 \mathrm{ms} \pm 513 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.284 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
full_test	query-limited	$$136 \mathrm{ms} \pm 454 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.88 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
full_test	query-unlimited	$$148 \mathrm{ms} \pm 645 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.73 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-limited	$$105 \mathrm{ms} \pm 558 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.018 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-unlimited	$$585 \mathrm{ms} \pm 4.53 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}4.70 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph