BE-481: HashQL: Reify null and empty tuple as unit constants by indietyp · Pull Request #8853 · hashintel/hash

indietyp · 2026-06-11T12:34:41Z

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

During MIR reification, null primitive values and empty tuples were not being lowered to the canonical unit constant (). This meant that null literals and #tuple: [] expressions were handled inconsistently compared to other unit-like values. This PR ensures both are promoted to Constant::Unit during reification, aligning them with the existing treatment of unit expressions.

🔍 What does this change?

Primitive::Null is now matched before the general Primitive arm in both atom.rs and rvalue.rs, lowering it directly to Constant::Unit instead of falling through to the opaque constant path.
Empty tuples (Tuple { fields } where fields.is_empty()) are now lowered to Constant::Unit in rvalue.rs rather than being constructed as a zero-field aggregate.
Existing snapshot tests for filter-aggressive have been updated to reflect that null comparisons now display as == () rather than == null in MIR output.

🛡 What tests cover this?

New UI test reify/null-value verifies that a null literal is reified as a unit constant.
New UI test reify/null-value-in-binary verifies that null values used in binary expressions (e.g. equality comparisons) are correctly promoted to ().
New UI test reify/empty-tuple verifies that an empty tuple expression is reified as a unit constant.

❓ How to test this?

Run the MIR UI tests: cargo test -p hashql-mir
Confirm all new and existing snapshot tests pass.

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

vercel · 2026-06-11T12:34:46Z

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

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
hash	Ready	Preview, Comment	Jun 12, 2026 12:42pm

2 Skipped Deployments

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
hashdotdesign-tokens	Ignored	Preview	Jun 12, 2026 12:42pm
petrinaut	Skipped		Jun 12, 2026 12:42pm

cursor · 2026-06-11T12:34:51Z

PR Summary

Low Risk
Scoped to MIR reification lowering and snapshot tests; aligns with existing interpretation of null as unit, with no auth or runtime graph changes.

Overview
MIR reification now treats null literals and empty tuples as the canonical unit constant (), instead of opaque null primitives or zero-field tuple aggregates.

Primitive::Null is handled in atom.rs (operand) and rvalue.rs (rvalue_data) before the general primitive path, emitting Constant::Unit. #tuple: [] in rvalue.rs loads () rather than building an empty aggregate. Snapshot output for graph filters now shows == () instead of == null. New UI tests cover standalone null, null in ==, and empty tuple reification.

^{Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 95715c4. Bugbot is set up for automated code reviews on this repo. Configure here.}

indietyp · 2026-06-11T12:35:04Z

Warning

This pull request is not mergeable via GitHub because a downstack PR is open. Once all requirements are satisfied, merge this PR as a stack on Graphite.
Learn more

BE-481: HashQL: Reify null and empty tuple as unit constants #8853 👈 (View in Graphite)
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
main

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

Copilot

Pull request overview

This PR standardizes MIR reification so that null literals and empty tuple literals are lowered to the canonical unit constant Constant::Unit (()), aligning them with existing unit-expression handling and making MIR output consistent.

Changes:

Reify Primitive::Null directly into Constant::Unit in both atom and rvalue lowering.
Reify empty tuple literals (#tuple: []) into Constant::Unit instead of a zero-field tuple aggregate.
Add new MIR UI tests for null and empty tuple reification, and update an existing snapshot to reflect == () comparisons.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 9 out of 9 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.

Show a summary per file

File	Description
libs/@local/hashql/mir/src/reify/rvalue.rs	Lowers `null` primitives and empty tuple data nodes to `Constant::Unit` during rvalue reification.
libs/@local/hashql/mir/src/reify/atom.rs	Lowers `null` primitives to `Constant::Unit` when reifying atom operands.
libs/@local/hashql/mir/tests/ui/reify/null-value.jsonc	Adds UI test input asserting `null` literal is promoted to unit.
libs/@local/hashql/mir/tests/ui/reify/null-value.stdout	Adds expected MIR output showing `return ()` for `null`.
libs/@local/hashql/mir/tests/ui/reify/null-value-in-binary.jsonc	Adds UI test input asserting `null` promotion inside a binary expression.
libs/@local/hashql/mir/tests/ui/reify/null-value-in-binary.stdout	Adds expected MIR output showing `null` operands lowered to `()` before comparison.
libs/@local/hashql/mir/tests/ui/reify/empty-tuple.jsonc	Adds UI test input asserting empty tuple literal is promoted to unit.
libs/@local/hashql/mir/tests/ui/reify/empty-tuple.stdout	Adds expected MIR output showing empty tuple lowered to `()`.
libs/@local/hashql/mir/tests/ui/pass/inline/filter-aggressive.stdout	Updates snapshot output to reflect `null` comparisons now printing as `== ()`.

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

codspeed-hq · 2026-06-11T12:41:16Z

Merging this PR will not alter performance

✅ 24 untouched benchmarks
⏩ 56 skipped benchmarks¹

_{Comparing bm/be-481-hashql-lower-null-to-constantunit-during-reification (95715c4) with bm/be-537-hashql-remove-old-backend-wire-up-hashql-in-the-api (c541263)}

56 benchmarks were skipped, so the baseline results were used instead. If they were deleted from the codebase, click here and archive them to remove them from the performance reports. ↩

codecov · 2026-06-11T12:43:32Z

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 71.10%. Comparing base (c541263) to head (95715c4).

Additional details and impacted files

@@                                        Coverage Diff                                        @@
##           bm/be-537-hashql-remove-old-backend-wire-up-hashql-in-the-api    #8853      +/-   ##
=================================================================================================
- Coverage                                                          80.50%   71.10%   -9.41%     
=================================================================================================
  Files                                                                503      386     -117     
  Lines                                                              68311    53945   -14366     
  Branches                                                            1923     1330     -593     
=================================================================================================
- Hits                                                               54996    38357   -16639     
- Misses                                                             12700    15170    +2470     
+ Partials                                                             615      418     -197

Flag	Coverage Δ
rust.harpc-wire-protocol	`?`
rust.hash-graph-api	`7.81% <ø> (?)`
rust.hashql-eval	`79.44% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hashql-mir	`?`

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

Copilot reviewed 9 out of 9 changed files in this pull request and generated no new comments.

github-actions · 2026-06-12T14:00:13Z

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	$$27.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 225 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.329 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.55 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.344 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1001	$$14.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 92.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.36 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314	$$43.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 364 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.702 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$15.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 138 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.718 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1526	$$23.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 199 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.348 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078	$$29.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 195 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.617 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.89 \mathrm{ms} \pm 23.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.707 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033	$$13.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 141 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-7.480 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102	$$3.84 \mathrm{ms} \pm 27.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.484 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.04 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.219 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 51	$$3.42 \mathrm{ms} \pm 35.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.109 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269	$$5.25 \mathrm{ms} \pm 32.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.027 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.66 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.39 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 107	$$4.27 \mathrm{ms} \pm 26.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.775 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133	$$4.45 \mathrm{ms} \pm 26.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.079 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.47 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.608 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63	$$4.17 \mathrm{ms} \pm 32.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.235 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2	$$2.62 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.487 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.54 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.735 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1	$$2.59 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.235 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8	$$2.87 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.577 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.79 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.48 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3	$$2.91 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.290 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52	$$3.09 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.999 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.79 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.388 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 25	$$2.99 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.228 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94	$$3.51 \mathrm{ms} \pm 27.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.690 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.97 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.465 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 26	$$3.30 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.781 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66	$$3.39 \mathrm{ms} \pm 22.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.536 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.98 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.128 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29	$$3.54 \mathrm{ms} \pm 22.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.67 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth	1 entities	$$56.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 392 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.840 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	10 entities	$$47.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 232 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.839 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	25 entities	$$51.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 326 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.473 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	5 entities	$$45.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 237 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.255 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	50 entities	$$62.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 446 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.195 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	1 entities	$$63.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 409 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.191 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	10 entities	$$57.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 292 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.557 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	25 entities	$$105 \mathrm{ms} \pm 515 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.643 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	5 entities	$$47.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 217 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.215 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	50 entities	$$278 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.15 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{lightgreen}-7.097 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	1 entities	$$20.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 119 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.809 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	10 entities	$$20.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 133 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.237 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	25 entities	$$21.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 151 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.182 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	5 entities	$$20.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 127 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.574 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	50 entities	$$25.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 161 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.283 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$20.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 131 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.28 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$20.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 145 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.093 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	100 entities	$$20.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 143 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.58 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	1000 entities	$$20.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 154 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.119 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10000 entities	$$27.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 257 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.500 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	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`	$$35.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 306 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.835 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1`	$$35.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 305 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.567 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1`	$$35.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 448 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.868 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1`	$$35.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 400 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.061 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2`	$$35.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 452 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.41 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1`	$$35.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 338 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.059 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1`	$$34.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 404 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.940 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1`	$$34.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 313 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.150 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1`	$$34.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 318 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.296 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id	Account ID: `bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba`	$$8.77 \mathrm{ms} \pm 58.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.409 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$94.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 750 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.256 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$150 \mathrm{ms} \pm 775 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.921 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$102 \mathrm{ms} \pm 849 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.185 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$113 \mathrm{ms} \pm 721 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.288 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$120 \mathrm{ms} \pm 769 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.566 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$129 \mathrm{ms} \pm 702 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.450 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$104 \mathrm{ms} \pm 792 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.406 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$134 \mathrm{ms} \pm 709 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.939 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$112 \mathrm{ms} \pm 694 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.848 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$121 \mathrm{ms} \pm 692 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.224 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$124 \mathrm{ms} \pm 856 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.132 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$124 \mathrm{ms} \pm 711 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.369 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
full_test	query-limited	$$182 \mathrm{ms} \pm 897 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.700 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
full_test	query-unlimited	$$197 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.04 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{red}9.34 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-limited	$$108 \mathrm{ms} \pm 666 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}151 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-unlimited	$$599 \mathrm{ms} \pm 3.67 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{red}10.3 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

feat: implement Null -> Unit conversion

95715c4

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings June 11, 2026 12:34

vercel Bot temporarily deployed to Preview – petrinaut June 11, 2026 12:34 Inactive

indietyp mentioned this pull request Jun 11, 2026

BE-537: hgraph: REST /hashql endpoint with E2E tests #8827

Open

3 tasks

graphite-app Bot assigned indietyp Jun 11, 2026

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of indietyp June 11, 2026 12:34 View session

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 11, 2026

indietyp mentioned this pull request Jun 11, 2026

BE-592: HashQL: Remove old eval graph path and core value types #8841

Open

3 tasks

Copilot AI reviewed Jun 11, 2026

View reviewed changes

vercel Bot deployed to Preview – hash June 11, 2026 12:41 View deployment

indietyp force-pushed the bm/be-481-hashql-lower-null-to-constantunit-during-reification branch from 9bd6d9b to 912034f Compare June 12, 2026 11:08

indietyp force-pushed the bm/be-537-hashql-remove-old-backend-wire-up-hashql-in-the-api branch from 585c91d to 1622d96 Compare June 12, 2026 11:08

vercel Bot temporarily deployed to Preview – petrinaut June 12, 2026 11:08 Inactive

vercel Bot deployed to Preview – hash June 12, 2026 11:22 View deployment

indietyp force-pushed the bm/be-481-hashql-lower-null-to-constantunit-during-reification branch from 912034f to 95715c4 Compare June 12, 2026 12:33

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings June 12, 2026 12:33

indietyp force-pushed the bm/be-537-hashql-remove-old-backend-wire-up-hashql-in-the-api branch from 1622d96 to c541263 Compare June 12, 2026 12:33

vercel Bot temporarily deployed to Preview – petrinaut June 12, 2026 12:33 Inactive

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of indietyp June 12, 2026 12:33 View session

Copilot AI reviewed Jun 12, 2026

View reviewed changes

vercel Bot deployed to Preview – hash June 12, 2026 12:42 View deployment

Conversation

indietyp commented Jun 11, 2026

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

🔍 What does this change?

🛡 What tests cover this?

❓ How to test this?

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?

Uh oh!

vercel Bot commented Jun 11, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

cursor Bot commented Jun 11, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

PR Summary

Uh oh!

indietyp commented Jun 11, 2026

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 11, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Merging this PR will not alter performance

Footnotes

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented Jun 11, 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

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Jun 12, 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

vercel Bot commented Jun 11, 2026 •

edited

Loading

cursor Bot commented Jun 11, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codspeed-hq Bot commented Jun 11, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov Bot commented Jun 11, 2026 •

edited

Loading