Skip to content

SRE-942: Fix broken Petrinaut CSS by moving postcss resolutions to 8.5.26 - #9196

Merged
TimDiekmann merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
claude/fix-petrinaut-css-postcss-8-5-26
Aug 11, 2026
Merged

SRE-942: Fix broken Petrinaut CSS by moving postcss resolutions to 8.5.26#9196
TimDiekmann merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
claude/fix-petrinaut-css-postcss-8-5-26

Conversation

@claude

@claude claude Bot commented Aug 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Requested by Chris Feijoo, Alex Leon · Slack thread

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

Fixes the broken CSS on demo.petrinaut.org.

Before: the Petrinaut editor and the ds-components render without their colour palette. 627 colour custom properties are missing from the built stylesheet — every numeric colour ramp (--colors-{blue,green,neutral,orange,pink,purple,red,yellow,status-*}-{s,a}00…125) and the utilities built on top of them. The semantic tokens that survive still point at those ramps through var(), so they resolve to nothing: in the broken build --colors-blue-s10 is referenced 8 times and defined 0 times.

After: the stylesheet contains all 2004 custom properties again, and is byte-identical to the last known-good build.

Why: postcss 8.5.25 makes Panda drop those declarations while generating the stylesheet. postcss 8.5.26 (published 2026-08-06) is upstream's own fix for that regression. 8.5.25 reached the tree through #9182, which repointed the root postcss resolution onto it.

Measured on the Petrinaut website build (turbo build --filter='@apps/petrinaut-website', the vercel-build.sh path):

custom properties bytes asset
postcss 8.5.25 (current main) 1377 1,563,308 index-YH_CDGgr.css
postcss 8.5.26 (this PR) 2004 1,623,529 index-Bom45vxT.css

The asset hash matches the last known-good build, so the output is byte-identical to it. --colors-blue-s10 and --colors-status-error-a50 are both defined again.

🔗 Related links

🚫 Blocked by

  • Nothing.

🔍 What does this change?

Both root postcss resolutions entries move from 8.5.25 to 8.5.26, and the lockfile is regenerated so the tree stays on a single shared copy of postcss.

  • package.jsonnext/postcss 8.5.258.5.26
  • package.jsonpostcss@npm:8.5.14 8.5.258.5.26
  • yarn.lock — regenerated. The postcss stanza moves to 8.5.26 and, after yarn dedupe --strategy highest, is a single shared entry again; no 8.5.25 copy remains anywhere in the lockfile. postcss 8.5.26 requires nanoid ^3.3.17 rather than ^3.3.16, so nanoid@^3.0.0 / ^3.3.17 dedupe onto 3.3.18 — required to keep the lockfile deduplicated, not incidental.

The resolution is keyed postcss@npm:8.5.14 rather than plain postcss because @pandacss/{postcss,node,core,generator} each declare a bare exact "postcss": "8.5.14", and the key targets that exact pin. #9182 also de-duplicated postcss — the lockfile went from two copies (8.5.18 nested for Panda, 8.5.22 hoisted) down to one shared stanza — which is why a single bad release now reaches Panda at all, where previously Panda had a copy of its own. Both entries are bumped rather than just the Panda one: 8.5.25 is known-bad, so leaving Next on it would be arbitrary.

No source files are touched.

Pre-Merge Checklist 🚀

🚢 Has this modified a publishable library?

This PR:

  • does not modify any publishable blocks or libraries, or modifications do not need publishing

📜 Does this require a change to the docs?

The changes in this PR:

  • are internal and do not require a docs change

🕸️ Does this require a change to the Turbo Graph?

The changes in this PR:

  • do not affect the execution graph

🛡 What tests cover this?

No automated test covers the generated stylesheet's token count, which is why this regression shipped silently. Verification here was the build-and-measure comparison in the table above.

yarn constraints, yarn dedupe --strategy highest --check and yarn install --immutable all exit 0 on this branch.

A regression test asserting a floor on the emitted custom-property count would catch this class of bug, but that felt out of scope here.

❓ How to test this?

  1. Check out the branch and run yarn install.
  2. Build the site: turbo build --filter='@apps/petrinaut-website' --env-mode=loose.
  3. Confirm the emitted apps/petrinaut-website/dist/assets/index-*.css is index-Bom45vxT.css at 1,623,529 bytes.
  4. Confirm --colors-blue-s10: and --colors-status-error-a50: are present as definitions, not just as var() references.
  5. Or view the Vercel preview deployment and confirm the editor renders with its colour palette.

Generated by Claude Code

postcss 8.5.25 makes Panda CSS silently drop 627 colour custom
properties from the generated stylesheet — every numeric colour ramp
(--colors-{blue,green,neutral,...}-{s,a}00..125 and the status-*
ramps) plus the utilities built on them. Semantic tokens still
reference them via var(), so the Petrinaut editor and ds-components
render without their palette.

postcss 8.5.26 is upstream's fix. Both root `resolutions` entries move
8.5.25 -> 8.5.26, and the lockfile is deduped so no 8.5.25 copy
remains anywhere in the tree.

The built stylesheet goes from 1377 to 2004 custom properties
(1,563,308 -> 1,623,529 bytes), byte-identical to the last known-good
build.
@vercel

vercel Bot commented Aug 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

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

Project Deployment Actions Updated (UTC)
hash Ready Ready Preview Aug 11, 2026 9:57am
hashdotdesign-tokens Ready Ready Preview Aug 11, 2026 9:57am
petrinaut Ready Ready Preview Aug 11, 2026 9:57am

@codecov

codecov Bot commented Aug 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 59.63%. Comparing base (f06f964) to head (a635feb).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #9196   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   59.63%   59.63%           
=======================================
  Files        1420     1420           
  Lines      138767   138767           
  Branches     6555     6555           
=======================================
  Hits        82754    82754           
  Misses      54949    54949           
  Partials     1064     1064           
Flag Coverage Δ
apps.hash-ai-worker-ts 1.99% <ø> (ø)
apps.hash-api 14.00% <ø> (ø)
blockprotocol.type-system 40.84% <ø> (ø)
local.claude-hooks 0.00% <ø> (ø)
local.harpc-client 51.49% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-backend-utils 3.27% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-graph-sdk 10.02% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-isomorphic-utils 12.22% <ø> (ø)
rust.antsi 2.36% <ø> (ø)
rust.error-stack 90.81% <ø> (ø)
rust.harpc-codec 84.70% <ø> (ø)
rust.harpc-net 96.23% <ø> (ø)
rust.harpc-tower 67.03% <ø> (ø)
rust.harpc-types 0.00% <ø> (ø)
rust.harpc-wire-protocol 92.23% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-codec 72.76% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-api 7.36% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-authorization 62.59% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-embeddings 91.88% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-postgres-store 29.33% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-store 46.78% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-temporal-versioning 47.95% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-types 0.00% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-validation 84.71% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-ast 89.63% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-compiletest 28.39% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-core 78.98% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-diagnostics 72.51% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-eval 79.82% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-hir 89.09% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-mir 87.92% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-syntax-jexpr 94.04% <ø> (ø)

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

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

@codspeed-hq

codspeed-hq Bot commented Aug 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Merging this PR will not alter performance

✅ 98 untouched benchmarks


Comparing claude/fix-petrinaut-css-postcss-8-5-26 (a635feb) with main (98c7b44)

Open in CodSpeed

@TimDiekmann
TimDiekmann marked this pull request as ready for review August 11, 2026 10:01
Copilot AI balanced review requested due to automatic review settings August 11, 2026 10:01
@TimDiekmann TimDiekmann changed the title Fix broken Petrinaut CSS: move postcss resolutions to 8.5.26 SRE-942: Fix broken Petrinaut CSS: move postcss resolutions to 8.5.26 Aug 11, 2026
@cursor

cursor Bot commented Aug 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

PR Summary

Low Risk
Dependency-only resolution and lockfile changes with no runtime code edits; risk is limited to build-time CSS processing behaviour, which this PR intentionally corrects.

Overview
Restores Petrinaut (and Panda) CSS by moving root Yarn resolutions for next/postcss and postcss@npm:8.5.14 from 8.5.25 to 8.5.26, which fixes the upstream regression where Panda dropped hundreds of colour custom properties from generated stylesheets.

yarn.lock is regenerated: postcss resolves to 8.5.26 (with nanoid bumped to 3.3.18 for the updated transitive range). No application source changes.

Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit a635feb. Bugbot is set up for automated code reviews on this repo. Configure here.

@TimDiekmann
TimDiekmann enabled auto-merge August 11, 2026 10:01
@claude claude Bot changed the title SRE-942: Fix broken Petrinaut CSS: move postcss resolutions to 8.5.26 SRE-942: Fix broken Petrinaut CSS by moving postcss resolutions to 8.5.26 Aug 11, 2026

Copilot AI left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

Updates PostCSS to 8.5.26 to restore Petrinaut’s generated CSS color properties.

Changes:

  • Updates both root PostCSS resolutions.
  • Regenerates dependency resolutions, including Nano ID 3.3.18.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 1 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.

File Description
package.json Pins PostCSS 8.5.26 for Next.js and PandaCSS.
yarn.lock Records updated PostCSS and Nano ID resolutions.

💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.

@TimDiekmann
TimDiekmann added this pull request to the merge queue Aug 11, 2026
Merged via the queue into main with commit 1e4cb8e Aug 11, 2026
194 of 195 checks passed
@TimDiekmann
TimDiekmann deleted the claude/fix-petrinaut-css-postcss-8-5-26 branch August 11, 2026 10:25
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Benchmark results

@rust/hash-graph-benches – Integrations

policy_resolution_large

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2002 $$28.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 231 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.00 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$3.40 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.702 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1002 $$12.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 111 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.067 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314 $$42.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 506 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.180 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$13.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 132 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.685 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1527 $$23.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 231 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.448 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078 $$29.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 178 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.60 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$3.70 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.467 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033 $$13.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 115 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.554 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102 $$3.78 \mathrm{ms} \pm 28.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.017 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.96 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.292 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 52 $$3.32 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.877 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269 $$5.19 \mathrm{ms} \pm 36.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.32 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$3.52 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.257 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 108 $$4.15 \mathrm{ms} \pm 29.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.266 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133 $$4.42 \mathrm{ms} \pm 39.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.42 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$3.44 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.193 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63 $$4.06 \mathrm{ms} \pm 25.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.032 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2 $$2.56 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.394 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.46 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.939 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 2 $$2.53 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.568 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8 $$2.80 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.446 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.63 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.989 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3 $$2.80 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.706 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52 $$3.01 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.650 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.72 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.463 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 26 $$2.90 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.514 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94 $$3.40 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.177 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.97 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.850 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 27 $$3.20 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.995 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66 $$3.33 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.522 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1 $$2.94 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.712 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29 $$3.27 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.281 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth 1 entities $$42.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 234 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.483 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth 10 entities $$32.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 217 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.206 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth 25 entities $$35.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 241 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.526 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth 5 entities $$31.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 228 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.449 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth 50 entities $$41.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 245 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.691 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth 1 entities $$49.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 254 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.685 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth 10 entities $$40.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 234 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.641 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth 25 entities $$90.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 618 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.523 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth 5 entities $$33.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 228 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.119 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth 50 entities $$272 \mathrm{ms} \pm 770 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.281 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth 1 entities $$10.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 63.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.697 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth 10 entities $$11.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 68.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.536 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth 25 entities $$11.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 64.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.664 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth 5 entities $$10.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 77.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.247 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth 50 entities $$10.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 68.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.564 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
entity_by_id 1 entities $$10.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 63.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.136 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id 10 entities $$11.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 74.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.344 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id 100 entities $$11.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 63.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.237 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id 1000 entities $$11.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 60.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.272 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id 10000 entities $$11.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 71.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.547 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

representative_read_entity

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/block/v/1 $$11.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 66.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.117 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1 $$11.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 70.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.157 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1 $$11.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 63.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.620 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1 $$11.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 59.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.146 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2 $$11.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 80.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.544 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1 $$11.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 76.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.201 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1 $$11.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 64.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.716 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1 $$11.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 59.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.233 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1 $$11.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 70.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.352 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id Account ID: bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba $$8.47 \mathrm{ms} \pm 54.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.696 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
entity_by_property traversal_paths=0 0 $$58.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 428 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.960 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property traversal_paths=255 1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true $$110 \mathrm{ms} \pm 755 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.454 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false $$65.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 409 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.269 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true $$74.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 557 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.466 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true $$83.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 505 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.283 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true $$88.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 376 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.100 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property traversal_paths=0 0 $$44.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 254 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.215 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property traversal_paths=255 1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true $$72.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 521 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.33 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false $$50.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 271 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.067 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true $$59.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 363 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.101 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true $$61.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 367 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.17 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property traversal_paths=2 1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true $$61.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 407 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.937 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
full_test query-limited $$129 \mathrm{ms} \pm 730 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.37 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
full_test query-unlimited $$138 \mathrm{ms} \pm 679 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.47 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
linked_queries query-limited $$19.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 284 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.59 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
linked_queries query-unlimited $$523 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.04 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}-2.004 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

area/deps Relates to third-party dependencies (area)

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants