BE-578: Gate `sink` imports behind `cfg(nightly)` by TimDiekmann · Pull Request #8768 · hashintel/hash

TimDiekmann · 2026-05-27T09:39:50Z

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

error-stack with the unstable feature failed to compile on stable Rust. sink.rs imported core::ops::{FromResidual, Try} unconditionally, but those traits require the nightly-only try_trait_v2 feature — which (along with their impls) was already gated behind cfg(nightly). The unconditional import therefore broke stable builds with E0658.

This gates the import to match, and bumps the crate to 0.7.1 for release.

🔗 Related links

Fixes Missing cfg for sink.rs Imports Results in Compilation Error With Stable Rust #8766

🔍 What does this change?

Gate use core::{convert::Infallible, ops::{FromResidual, Try}} in sink.rs behind #[cfg(nightly)], mirroring the existing #![cfg_attr(all(nightly, feature = "unstable"), feature(try_trait_v2))] gate in lib.rs and the already-gated Try/FromResidual impls.
ReportSink's core API (new/append/capture/finish) and the multi-error bail![…] macro remain available on stable; only the ?-operator support (the Try/FromResidual impls) stays nightly-only — i.e. status quo.
Bump error-stack to 0.7.1 (Cargo.toml, package.json, Cargo.lock) and add the 0.7.1 changelog entry.

This is the minimal fix the issue author and branch name describe — gating just the import — rather than gating the whole sink module, which would have removed ReportSink from stable and broken multi-error bail!.

Pre-Merge Checklist 🚀

🚢 Has this modified a publishable library?

This PR:

modifies a Cargo-publishable library and I have amended the version

📜 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

⚠️ Known issues

None.

🐾 Next steps

Publish error-stack 0.7.1 to crates.io (releasing today).

🛡 What tests cover this?

Existing sink.rs unit tests cover ReportSink's stable API (add_*, capture_*); the ?-operator tests stay #[cfg(nightly)].
Verified locally: cargo check -p error-stack --features unstable on nightly compiles, and a stable-emulated check (nightly cfg disabled via a temporary build.rs patch) also compiles with no remaining try_trait_v2 reference. A true cargo +stable build cannot run from the workspace root because the manifest uses the nightly-only codegen-backend Cargo feature.

❓ How to test this?

On a stable toolchain, add the dependency: cargo add -F unstable error-stack (or path-depend on this branch).
Run cargo check.
Confirm it compiles — previously it failed with error[E0658]: use of unstable library feature 'try_trait_v2'.

On stable Rust the `unstable` feature failed to compile because `sink.rs` imported `core::ops::{FromResidual, Try}` (gated by the nightly-only `try_trait_v2`) unconditionally, while the corresponding impls and the `try_trait_v2` compiler feature were already gated behind `cfg(nightly)`. Gate the import to match, so the crate compiles on stable with `unstable` enabled. `ReportSink` and the multi-error `bail!` remain usable on stable; only the `?`-operator support stays nightly-only. Bump to 0.7.1. Fixes #8766

vercel · 2026-05-27T09:39:56Z

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

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
hash	Ready	Preview, Comment	May 27, 2026 9:52am
hashdotdesign-tokens	Ready	Preview, Comment	May 27, 2026 9:52am
petrinaut	Ready	Preview, Comment	May 27, 2026 9:52am

cursor · 2026-05-27T09:39:58Z

PR Summary

Low Risk
Single cfg-guard on imports plus a patch release; no API or behavior change on stable beyond restoring compilation.

Overview
Fixes stable Rust builds when error-stack is used with the unstable feature: sink.rs no longer imports nightly-only Try / FromResidual unless cfg(nightly) is set, matching the existing gates on those impls and try_trait_v2 in lib.rs. ReportSink’s stable API and multi-error bail! behavior are unchanged; only ? on ReportSink stays nightly-only.

Releases 0.7.1 (version bumps in Cargo.toml, package.json, lockfile, and changelog).

^{Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit e325dac. Bugbot is set up for automated code reviews on this repo. Configure here.}

augmentcode · 2026-05-27T09:42:22Z

🤖 Augment PR Summary

Summary: Fixes stable Rust builds of error-stack with unstable enabled by gating the nightly-only Try/FromResidual import in sink.rs behind cfg(nightly).
Also: Bumps the crate/package version to 0.7.1 for release.

_{🤖 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 · 2026-05-27T09:44:17Z

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 59.04%. Comparing base (eff686d) to head (e325dac).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #8768   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   59.04%   59.04%           
=======================================
  Files        1340     1340           
  Lines      129323   129323           
  Branches     5839     5839           
=======================================
+ Hits        76360    76363    +3     
+ Misses      52062    52059    -3     
  Partials      901      901

Flag	Coverage Δ
apps.hash-ai-worker-ts	`1.41% <ø> (ø)`
apps.hash-api	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
blockprotocol.type-system	`40.84% <ø> (ø)`
local.claude-hooks	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
local.hash-backend-utils	`2.81% <ø> (ø)`
local.hash-graph-sdk	`9.63% <ø> (ø)`
local.hash-isomorphic-utils	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
rust.antsi	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
rust.harpc-codec	`84.70% <ø> (ø)`
rust.harpc-net	`96.24% <ø> (+0.04%)`	⬆️
rust.harpc-tower	`67.03% <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	`26.74% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hash-graph-store	`37.76% <ø> (ø)`
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	`28.26% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hashql-core	`79.32% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hashql-diagnostics	`72.53% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hashql-eval	`75.77% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hashql-hir	`89.06% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hashql-mir	`86.80% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hashql-syntax-jexpr	`94.06% <ø> (ø)`

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by 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 · 2026-05-27T09:47:24Z

Merging this PR will not alter performance

✅ 80 untouched benchmarks

_{Comparing t/be-578-gate-sinkrs-imports-behind-cfgnightly (6b4d0f4) with main (97bd10e)}

github-actions · 2026-05-27T11:01:57Z

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	$$27.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 190 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.225 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.47 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.431 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1001	$$12.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 90.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.426 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314	$$44.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 342 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.374 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$15.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 110 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.11 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1526	$$25.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 206 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.69 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078	$$28.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 175 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.315 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.77 \mathrm{ms} \pm 22.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.222 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033	$$13.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 113 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.419 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102	$$3.87 \mathrm{ms} \pm 23.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.261 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.09 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.45 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 51	$$3.43 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.120 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269	$$5.32 \mathrm{ms} \pm 32.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.673 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.64 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.187 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 107	$$4.27 \mathrm{ms} \pm 25.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.214 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133	$$4.55 \mathrm{ms} \pm 29.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.315 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.50 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.559 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63	$$4.21 \mathrm{ms} \pm 22.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.864 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2	$$2.80 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.75 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.74 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.75 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1	$$2.86 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.28 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8	$$3.13 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.78 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.93 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.522 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3	$$3.25 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.45 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52	$$3.18 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.18 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.84 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.575 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 25	$$3.04 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.873 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94	$$3.64 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.880 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.12 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.230 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 26	$$3.37 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.054 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66	$$3.56 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.45 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.16 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.38 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29	$$3.51 \mathrm{ms} \pm 28.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.73 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth	1 entities	$$47.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 240 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.62 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	10 entities	$$86.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 472 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.88 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	25 entities	$$52.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 324 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.34 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	5 entities	$$53.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 225 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.29 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	50 entities	$$64.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 389 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.61 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	1 entities	$$48.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 240 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.09 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	10 entities	$$437 \mathrm{ms} \pm 959 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.74 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	25 entities	$$105 \mathrm{ms} \pm 544 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.39 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	5 entities	$$94.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 401 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.23 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	50 entities	$$299 \mathrm{ms} \pm 944 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.86 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	1 entities	$$19.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 107 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.10 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	10 entities	$$20.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 106 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.53 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	25 entities	$$20.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 124 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.95 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	5 entities	$$21.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 109 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.72 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	50 entities	$$25.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 142 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.08 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$20.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 126 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.14 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$19.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 116 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.62 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	100 entities	$$19.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 90.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.890 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	1000 entities	$$20.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 98.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.06 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10000 entities	$$25.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 212 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.452 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	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`	$$33.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 302 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.596 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1`	$$33.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 356 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-7.243 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1`	$$34.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 324 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.691 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1`	$$34.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 374 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.435 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2`	$$33.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 317 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.689 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1`	$$34.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 282 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.709 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1`	$$34.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 256 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.407 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1`	$$34.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 331 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.853 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1`	$$34.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 326 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.252 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id	Account ID: `bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba`	$$8.54 \mathrm{ms} \pm 42.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.527 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$93.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 488 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.213 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$154 \mathrm{ms} \pm 711 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.20 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$101 \mathrm{ms} \pm 571 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.157 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$109 \mathrm{ms} \pm 596 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.087 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$118 \mathrm{ms} \pm 659 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.570 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$129 \mathrm{ms} \pm 776 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.78 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$106 \mathrm{ms} \pm 509 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.76 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$130 \mathrm{ms} \pm 687 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.240 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$110 \mathrm{ms} \pm 493 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.873 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$118 \mathrm{ms} \pm 643 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.555 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$121 \mathrm{ms} \pm 671 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.309 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$120 \mathrm{ms} \pm 740 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.793 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
full_test	query-limited	$$132 \mathrm{ms} \pm 430 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.378 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
full_test	query-unlimited	$$145 \mathrm{ms} \pm 564 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.083 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-limited	$$107 \mathrm{ms} \pm 697 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.55 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-unlimited	$$538 \mathrm{ms} \pm 939 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.789 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

graphite-app Bot assigned TimDiekmann May 27, 2026

github-actions Bot added area/deps Relates to third-party dependencies (area) area/libs > error-stack Affects the `error-stack` crate (library) area/libs Relates to first-party libraries/crates/packages (area) labels May 27, 2026

BE-578: Add 0.7.1 changelog entry

e325dac

vercel Bot temporarily deployed to Preview – petrinaut May 27, 2026 09:40 Inactive

github-actions Bot added the area/infra Relates to version control, CI, CD or IaC (area) label May 27, 2026

augmentcode Bot reviewed May 27, 2026

View reviewed changes

TimDiekmann requested a review from a team May 27, 2026 09:42

vercel Bot deployed to Preview – hash May 27, 2026 09:52 View deployment

indietyp approved these changes May 27, 2026

View reviewed changes

TimDiekmann enabled auto-merge May 27, 2026 10:00

TimDiekmann added this pull request to the merge queue May 27, 2026

Merged via the queue into main with commit a8da2f8 May 27, 2026
179 checks passed

TimDiekmann deleted the t/be-578-gate-sinkrs-imports-behind-cfgnightly branch May 27, 2026 10:20

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

BE-578: Gate `sink` imports behind `cfg(nightly)`#8768

BE-578: Gate `sink` imports behind `cfg(nightly)`#8768
TimDiekmann merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
t/be-578-gate-sinkrs-imports-behind-cfgnightly

TimDiekmann commented May 27, 2026

Uh oh!

vercel Bot commented May 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

cursor Bot commented May 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

augmentcode Bot commented May 27, 2026

Uh oh!

augmentcode Bot left a comment

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented May 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

codspeed-hq Bot commented May 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented May 27, 2026

@rust/hash-graph-benches – Integrations

policy_resolution_large

policy_resolution_medium

policy_resolution_none

policy_resolution_small

read_scaling_complete

read_scaling_linkless

representative_read_entity

representative_read_entity_type

representative_read_multiple_entities

scenarios

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

Conversation

TimDiekmann commented May 27, 2026

🌟 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?

⚠️ Known issues

🐾 Next steps

🛡 What tests cover this?

❓ How to test this?

Uh oh!

vercel Bot commented May 27, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

cursor Bot commented May 27, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

PR Summary

Uh oh!

augmentcode Bot commented May 27, 2026

Uh oh!

augmentcode Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented May 27, 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 May 27, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Merging this PR will not alter performance

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented May 27, 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 May 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading

cursor Bot commented May 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov Bot commented May 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codspeed-hq Bot commented May 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading