SRE-908: Delete the block-publishing workflows

[TimDiekmann]

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

Deletes the two manually-triggered block-publishing workflows. Neither has a single recorded run, both resolve blockprotocol@latest fresh at run time, and the preview variant holds id-token: write together with a Block Protocol API key (SRE-908).

🔗 Related links

• SRE-908 (internal)

🔍 What does this change?

• Deletes .github/workflows/publish-blocks-to-preview.yml and .github/workflows/publish-blocks-to-production.yml
• Updates the "Publishing blocks" section in blocks/README.md, which described these workflows

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

⚠️ Known issues

• Publishing HASH blocks to the Þ Hub from this repository has no CI path afterwards; yarn create-block and the block workspaces are untouched.

🐾 Next steps

• Delete the now-orphaned BLOCK_PROTOCOL_API_KEY_HASH_PREVIEW / BLOCK_PROTOCOL_API_KEY_HASH_PRODUCTION Actions secrets as part of SRE-916.

🛡 What tests cover this?

• None; the deleted workflows had no callers.

❓ How to test this?

1. Search the repository for references to the deleted workflow names — none remain.

[vercel]

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

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
hash	Ready	Preview	Aug 10, 2026 11:58am
hashdotdesign-tokens	Ready	Preview	Aug 10, 2026 11:58am
petrinaut	Ready	Preview	Aug 10, 2026 11:58am

[cursor]

PR Summary

Low Risk
CI and documentation-only removal of workflows with no recorded runs; no application or library code changes.

Overview
Removes the two manually triggered GitHub Actions workflows that built and published HASH blocks via unpinned npx blockprotocol@latest publish (preview and production).

Updates blocks/README.md so the publishing section no longer documents those repo-specific workflows and instead points readers to the Block Protocol docs for publishing to the Þ Hub.

There is no replacement CI path in this PR for publishing blocks from this repository.

^{Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 02f2bf0. Bugbot is set up for automated code reviews on this repo. Configure here.}

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 59.58%. Comparing base (77fb79c) to head (02f2bf0).
⚠️ Report is 4 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #9187      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   59.58%   59.58%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files        1419     1419              
  Lines      138220   138220              
  Branches     6549     6549              
==========================================
- Hits        82355    82354       -1     
- Misses      54801    54802       +1     
  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	96.19% <ø> (-0.02%)	⬇️
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	29.66% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-store	42.16% <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.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Removes unused, manually triggered block-publishing workflows and updates the related documentation.

Changes:

• Deletes preview and production publishing workflows.
• Directs users to Þ Hub publishing documentation.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 3 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.

File	Description
blocks/README.md	Removes references to deleted workflows.
.github/workflows/publish-blocks-to-production.yml	Deletes production publishing workflow.
.github/workflows/publish-blocks-to-preview.yml	Deletes preview publishing workflow.

---

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

[codspeed]

Merging this PR will degrade performance by 15.38%

❌ 2 regressed benchmarks
✅ 96 untouched benchmarks

Warning

Please fix the performance issues or acknowledge them on CodSpeed.

Performance Changes

	Benchmark	BASE	HEAD	Efficiency
❌	bit_matrix/dense/iter_row[64]	140.8 ns	170 ns	-17.16%
❌	bit_matrix/dense/iter_row[200]	185.8 ns	215 ns	-13.57%

Tip

Investigate this regression by commenting @codspeedbot fix this regression on this PR, or directly use the CodSpeed MCP with your agent.

---

_{Comparing t/sre-908-delete-block-publishing-workflows (02f2bf0) with main (2ed2383)}

[github-actions]

Benchmark results

@rust/hash-graph-benches – Integrations

policy_resolution_large

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2002	$$27.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 231 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.014 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.45 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.688 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1002	$$13.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 90.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.817 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314	$$44.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 414 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.304 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$14.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 112 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.794 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1527	$$24.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 170 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.493 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078	$$29.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 241 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.742 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.87 \mathrm{ms} \pm 31.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.595 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033	$$15.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 126 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.777 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102	$$3.92 \mathrm{ms} \pm 22.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.296 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.10 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.035 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 52	$$3.64 \mathrm{ms} \pm 27.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.78 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269	$$5.30 \mathrm{ms} \pm 29.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.547 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.64 \mathrm{ms} \pm 26.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.39 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 108	$$4.19 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.300 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133	$$4.52 \mathrm{ms} \pm 32.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.043 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.57 \mathrm{ms} \pm 27.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.094 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63	$$4.20 \mathrm{ms} \pm 31.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.386 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2	$$2.72 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.347 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.59 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.19 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 2	$$2.71 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.783 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8	$$2.96 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.708 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.77 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.955 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3	$$3.02 \mathrm{ms} \pm 22.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.51 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52	$$3.09 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.945 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.79 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.761 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 26	$$3.03 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.811 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94	$$3.49 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.794 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.03 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.970 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 27	$$3.32 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.207 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66	$$3.41 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.251 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.02 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.567 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29	$$3.44 \mathrm{ms} \pm 29.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.754 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth	1 entities	$$43.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 311 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.669 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	10 entities	$$34.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 213 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.329 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	25 entities	$$37.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 261 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.123 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	5 entities	$$32.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 221 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.459 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	50 entities	$$43.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 258 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.315 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	1 entities	$$50.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 337 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.513 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	10 entities	$$41.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 262 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.694 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	25 entities	$$94.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 549 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.533 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	5 entities	$$35.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 233 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.977 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	50 entities	$$301 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.29 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}-3.238 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	1 entities	$$11.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 89.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.02 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	10 entities	$$11.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 85.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.34 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	25 entities	$$11.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 71.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.58 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	5 entities	$$11.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 66.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.424 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	50 entities	$$11.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 74.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.36 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$11.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 73.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.15 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$11.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 76.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.26 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	100 entities	$$11.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 82.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.979 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	1000 entities	$$11.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 58.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.521 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10000 entities	$$11.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 83.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.40 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	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	$$11.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 89.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.108 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1	$$11.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 71.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.529 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1	$$11.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 89.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.859 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1	$$11.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 78.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.764 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2	$$12.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 102 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.967 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1	$$12.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 69.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.106 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1	$$11.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 68.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.869 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1	$$12.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 81.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.100 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1	$$11.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 87.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.372 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id	Account ID: bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba	$$9.10 \mathrm{ms} \pm 65.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.435 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$60.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 395 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.80 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$115 \mathrm{ms} \pm 549 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.49 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$68.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 522 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.82 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$77.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 464 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.11 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$87.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 651 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.52 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$93.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 834 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.05 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$45.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 259 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.499 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$74.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 452 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.206 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$51.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 496 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.050 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$60.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 443 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.494 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$62.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 396 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.158 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$62.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 449 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.561 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
full_test	query-limited	$$124 \mathrm{ms} \pm 662 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.76 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
full_test	query-unlimited	$$135 \mathrm{ms} \pm 659 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.20 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-limited	$$19.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 180 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.409 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-unlimited	$$513 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.39 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{lightgreen}-7.607 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph