BE-271: HashQL: Implement `PostInline` pass #8240

indietyp · 2026-01-03T21:18:29Z

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

Implements the PostInline pass for HashQL MIR, which runs canonicalization optimizations after inlining to exploit newly exposed optimization opportunities such as constant propagation, dead code elimination, and branch simplification. Additionally, adds is_leaf recomputation after inlining to expose more bonuses and adjusts the config slightly.

🔍 What does this change?

Adds PostInline pass as a thin wrapper around Canonicalization with a higher iteration limit (16 vs 8 for PreInline) since inlining can expose more optimization opportunities
Ensures is_leaf status properly propagates through the call graph analysis during inlining
Adds IdVec::fill_to method for efficiently extending vectors to a specific length
Adds comprehensive UI tests covering:
- Cascading simplification after inlining
- Closure environment cleanup
- Constant propagation after inlining
- Dead code elimination from inlined functions
- Nested branch elimination
- Full showcase demonstrating complex nested conditionals collapsing to a single return value
Adds benchmark pipeline for post-inline 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

cursor · 2026-01-03T21:18:34Z

PR Summary

Implements a post-inlining optimization stage and aligns analysis/benchmarks accordingly.

Adds PostInline (wrapper over Canonicalization with max_iterations=16) and compiletest suite mir/pass/transform/post-inline
Updates inline analysis: BodyProperties now stores source; new FindApplyCall visitor; recompute is_leaf after inlining
Refines call graph queries to consider only Apply edges for leaf/single-caller/unique-caller checks
Adjusts inline heuristics defaults (always_inline=16, size_penalty_factor=0.9)
Extends IdVec with from_domain_derive(_in) for allocator-aware derivation
Benchmarks: support multi-body scenarios, add full PreInline → Inline → PostInline pipeline and an inlining-specific case
Adds UI tests validating post-inline effects (cascading simplification, closure env cleanup, constant propagation, dead code and nested branch elimination)

^{Written by Cursor Bugbot for commit 6cc07e5. This will update automatically on new commits. Configure here.}

indietyp · 2026-01-03T21:19:27Z

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

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

augmentcode · 2026-01-03T21:21:56Z

🤖 Augment PR Summary

Summary: Introduces a new post-inlining optimization stage for HashQL MIR to better capitalize on optimization opportunities exposed by inlining.

Changes:

Adds PostInline as a thin wrapper over Canonicalization with a higher iteration cap (16) and wires it into the MIR pass pipeline.
Extends the compiletest harness with a dedicated mir/pass/transform/post-inline suite (plus D2 rendering support) and adds multiple UI fixtures showcasing post-inline simplifications.
Updates MIR bench pipeline to run PreInline → Inline → PostInline and reuses a single GlobalTransformState across stages.
Refactors inlining analysis data: BodyProperties now carries source, and cost/loop metadata is grouped in CostEstimationResidual.
Recomputes is_leaf after inlining to unlock additional heuristic bonuses on newly simplified bodies.
Tweaks inlining heuristic defaults (always_inline and size_penalty_factor).
Adds a small IdVec helper (from_domain_derive*) to build property vectors from an existing domain.

Technical Notes: The PR also adjusts call-graph “single/unique caller” logic to consider only Apply edges and adds tracing as a dependency for MIR instrumentation.

_{🤖 Was this summary useful? React with 👍 or 👎}

augmentcode

Review completed. 2 suggestions posted.

Comment augment review to trigger a new review at any time.

libs/@local/hashql/mir/src/pass/transform/inline/mod.rs

libs/@local/hashql/mir/src/pass/transform/inline/find.rs

codspeed-hq · 2026-01-03T21:25:22Z

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #8240 will degrade performance by 24.47%

_{Comparing bm/be-271-hashql-implement-postinline-pass (6cc07e5) with bm/be-269-hashql-move-out-most-of-preinline-into-a-canonicalization (0a15246)}

Summary

❌ 3 (👁 3) regressions
✅ 14 untouched
🆕 1 new
🗄️ 12 archived benchmarks run¹

Benchmarks breakdown

	Benchmark	`BASE`	`HEAD`	Efficiency
👁	`diamond`	68.7 µs	84.5 µs	-18.68%
🆕	`inline`	N/A	232.3 µs	N/A
👁	`complex`	99.8 µs	119.1 µs	-16.22%
👁	`linear`	38.2 µs	50.6 µs	-24.47%

12 benchmarks were run, but are now archived. If they were deleted in another branch, consider rebasing to remove them from the report. Instead if they were added back, click here to restore them. ↩

codecov · 2026-01-03T21:26:41Z

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 96.70330% with 3 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 65.00%. Comparing base (0a15246) to head (6cc07e5).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...local/hashql/mir/src/pass/transform/inline/find.rs	84.21%	2 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@                                           Coverage Diff                                           @@
##           bm/be-269-hashql-move-out-most-of-preinline-into-a-canonicalization    #8240      +/-   ##
=======================================================================================================
+ Coverage                                                                64.96%   65.00%   +0.03%     
=======================================================================================================
  Files                                                                      736      737       +1     
  Lines                                                                    63019    63085      +66     
  Branches                                                                  3680     3681       +1     
=======================================================================================================
+ Hits                                                                     40939    41007      +68     
+ Misses                                                                   21600    21597       -3     
- Partials                                                                   480      481       +1

Flag	Coverage Δ
rust.hashql-compiletest	`46.65% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hashql-mir	`89.77% <96.70%> (+0.08%)`	⬆️

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.

libs/@local/hashql/mir/src/pass/transform/post_inline.rs

github-actions · 2026-01-04T16:54:28Z

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	$$24.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 136 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-25.882 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.20 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.534 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1001	$$11.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 73.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.411 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314	$$41.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 315 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.217 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$13.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 76.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.784 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1526	$$22.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 144 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.563 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078	$$25.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 147 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-38.837 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.59 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-81.725 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033	$$13.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 63.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-51.233 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102	$$3.65 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.095 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.86 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.74 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 51	$$3.21 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.38 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269	$$4.97 \mathrm{ms} \pm 24.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.182 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.38 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.380 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 107	$$3.91 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.080 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133	$$4.38 \mathrm{ms} \pm 26.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.49 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.28 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.51 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63	$$3.95 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.24 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2	$$2.59 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.95 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.54 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.74 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1	$$2.68 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}11.3 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8	$$2.76 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.72 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.67 \mathrm{ms} \pm 8.53 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.66 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3	$$2.90 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.03 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52	$$2.94 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.67 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.61 \mathrm{ms} \pm 9.28 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.65 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 25	$$2.79 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.75 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94	$$3.26 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.87 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.91 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.34 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 26	$$3.07 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.69 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66	$$3.22 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.65 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.80 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.34 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29	$$3.11 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.54 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth	1 entities	$$39.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 155 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.16 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	10 entities	$$75.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 382 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.634 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	25 entities	$$43.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 183 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.36 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	5 entities	$$45.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 182 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.04 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	50 entities	$$53.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 230 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.23 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	1 entities	$$40.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 159 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.225 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	10 entities	$$412 \mathrm{ms} \pm 750 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.094 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	25 entities	$$94.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 419 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.087 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	5 entities	$$84.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 330 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.28 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	50 entities	$$283 \mathrm{ms} \pm 719 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.93 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	1 entities	$$14.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 61.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.446 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	10 entities	$$14.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 68.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.85 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	25 entities	$$15.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 69.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.29 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	5 entities	$$14.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 56.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.09 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	50 entities	$$17.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 114 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.62 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$14.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 75.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.24 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$14.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 78.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.03 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	100 entities	$$14.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 57.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.12 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	1000 entities	$$15.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 67.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.63 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10000 entities	$$22.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 146 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.892 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	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`	$$31.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 321 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.35 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1`	$$29.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 253 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.718 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1`	$$30.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 252 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.47 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1`	$$28.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 278 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.766 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2`	$$30.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 316 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.39 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1`	$$30.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 260 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.701 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1`	$$29.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 266 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.729 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1`	$$30.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 261 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.55 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1`	$$30.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 238 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.95 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id	Account ID: `bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba`	$$8.18 \mathrm{ms} \pm 34.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.99 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$47.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 226 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.72 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$95.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 385 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.93 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$52.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 299 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.94 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$60.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 297 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.29 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$70.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 509 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.40 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$75.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 374 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.55 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$50.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 278 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.58 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$76.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 401 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.89 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$58.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 345 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.34 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$65.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 374 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.77 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$67.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 354 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.51 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$67.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 306 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.85 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
full_test	query-limited	$$131 \mathrm{ms} \pm 493 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.69 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
full_test	query-unlimited	$$129 \mathrm{ms} \pm 502 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.697 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-limited	$$41.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 204 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-60.579 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-unlimited	$$568 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.20 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.786 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

indietyp added 3 commits January 3, 2026 21:11

feat: tests

f14a34e

feat: ensure that is_leaf propagates

9ce07b3

feat: add pipeline to benchmark

86cd8d6

graphite-app bot assigned indietyp Jan 3, 2026

github-actions bot added area/deps Relates to third-party dependencies (area) 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 Jan 3, 2026

indietyp mentioned this pull request Jan 3, 2026

BE-269: HashQL: Move PreInline out into Canonicalization pass #8239

Open

3 tasks

indietyp added 2 commits January 3, 2026 22:20

chore: remove tracing dep

33a545e

chore: remove tracing mention

50957fc

github-actions bot removed the area/deps Relates to third-party dependencies (area) label Jan 3, 2026

augmentcode bot reviewed Jan 3, 2026

View reviewed changes

libs/@local/hashql/mir/src/pass/transform/inline/mod.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

libs/@local/hashql/mir/src/pass/transform/inline/find.rs Show resolved Hide resolved

vercel bot deployed to Preview – petrinaut January 3, 2026 21:25 View deployment

vercel bot deployed to Preview – hash January 3, 2026 21:28 View deployment

feat: create new inlineable cfg benchmark

249445d

vercel bot temporarily deployed to Preview – petrinaut January 4, 2026 15:06 Inactive

graphite-app bot reviewed Jan 4, 2026

View reviewed changes

libs/@local/hashql/mir/src/pass/transform/post_inline.rs Show resolved Hide resolved

chore: format

6cc07e5

vercel bot temporarily deployed to Preview – petrinaut January 4, 2026 15:46 Inactive

graphite-app bot requested review from a team January 4, 2026 16:05

indietyp mentioned this pull request Jan 8, 2026

BE-254: HashQL: Implement MIR interpreter with runtime value representation #8245

Open

3 tasks

BE-271: HashQL: Implement PostInline pass #8240

Are you sure you want to change the base?

BE-271: HashQL: Implement PostInline pass #8240

Conversation

indietyp commented Jan 3, 2026

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

🔍 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?

Uh oh!

cursor bot commented Jan 3, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

PR Summary

Uh oh!

indietyp commented Jan 3, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

augmentcode bot commented Jan 3, 2026

Uh oh!

augmentcode bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

codspeed-hq bot commented Jan 3, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #8240 will degrade performance by 24.47%

Summary

Benchmarks breakdown

Footnotes

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Jan 3, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Jan 4, 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

BE-271: HashQL: Implement `PostInline` pass #8240

BE-271: HashQL: Implement `PostInline` pass #8240

cursor bot commented Jan 3, 2026 •

edited

Loading

indietyp commented Jan 3, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codspeed-hq bot commented Jan 3, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Jan 3, 2026 •

edited

Loading