BE-474: HashQL: Take into account terminator target eligibility in execution backend placement

[indietyp]

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

🔗 Related links

• ...

🚫 Blocked by

• ...

🔍 What does this change?

• ...

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

🐾 Next steps

🛡 What tests cover this?

❓ How to test this?

1. Checkout the branch / view the deployment
2. Try X
3. Confirm that Y

📹 Demo

[vercel]

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

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
hash	Ready	Preview, Comment	Mar 26, 2026 8:30am

3 Skipped Deployments

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
hashdotdesign	Ignored	Preview	Mar 26, 2026 8:30am
hashdotdesign-tokens	Ignored	Preview	Mar 26, 2026 8:30am
petrinaut	Skipped		Mar 26, 2026 8:30am

[indietyp]

Warning

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

• BE-494: HashQL: Loop-breaker selection for recursive inlining #8600
• BE-482: HashQL: Remove logical not from MIR and fix postgres boolean lowering #8595
• BE-474: HashQL: Take into account terminator target eligibility in execution backend placement #8587 👈 (View in Graphite)
• BE-455: HashQL: Introduce evaluation orchestrator #8586
• BE-306: HashQL: PostgreSQL translation #8526
• BE-457: HashQL: MIR execution pipeline extensions for postgres compilation #8525
• BE-456: HashQL: Entity type model enrichment and graph store query extensions #8524
• BE-429: HashQL: Add island dependency graph with data requirement resolution #8501
• BE-428: HashQL: Simplify traversal tracking to path recording #8498
• BE-434: HashQL: Refactor entity storage path resolution with centralized schema mapping #8496
• BE-427: Add hashql-macros crate with procedural macros for ID types and symbols #8495
• main

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

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 96.88507% with 29 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 70.06%. Comparing base (8045f18) to head (591383f).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...ass/execution/statement_placement/embedding/mod.rs	53.12%	15 Missing ⚠️
libs/@local/hashql/mir/src/pretty/text.rs	75.00%	7 Missing ⚠️
...al/hashql/compiletest/src/harness/test/discover.rs	0.00%	3 Missing ⚠️
...cal/hashql/mir/src/pass/execution/splitting/mod.rs	96.77%	1 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
...pass/execution/statement_placement/postgres/mod.rs	93.75%	1 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@                                    Coverage Diff                                     @@
##           bm/be-455-hashql-create-evaluation-target-coordinator    #8587       +/-   ##
==========================================================================================
+ Coverage                                                  53.46%   70.06%   +16.60%     
==========================================================================================
  Files                                                        976      979        +3     
  Lines                                                      94052    94895      +843     
  Branches                                                    4035     4445      +410     
==========================================================================================
+ Hits                                                       50281    66492    +16211     
+ Misses                                                     43234    27736    -15498     
- Partials                                                     537      667      +130     

Flag	Coverage Δ
apps.hash-ai-worker-ts	1.40% <ø> (ø)
apps.hash-api	0.00% <ø> (ø)
blockprotocol.type-system	?
local.hash-graph-sdk	9.63% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-isomorphic-utils	0.00% <ø> (ø)
rust.harpc-net	?
rust.harpc-tower	?
rust.hash-graph-api	2.52% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-authorization	?
rust.hash-graph-postgres-store	?
rust.hash-graph-store	?
rust.hash-graph-types	?
rust.hashql-ast	87.23% <ø> (?)
rust.hashql-compiletest	28.31% <0.00%> (-0.04%)	⬇️
rust.hashql-core	82.22% <100.00%> (+0.04%)	⬆️
rust.hashql-hir	89.06% <ø> (?)
rust.hashql-mir	91.65% <96.99%> (?)
rust.hashql-syntax-jexpr	94.05% <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]

Merging this PR will degrade performance by 19.34%

⚠️ Different runtime environments detected

Some benchmarks with significant performance changes were compared across different runtime environments,
which may affect the accuracy of the results.

Open the report in CodSpeed to investigate

❌ 1 regressed benchmark
✅ 79 untouched benchmarks

⚠️ Please fix the performance issues or acknowledge them on CodSpeed.

Performance Changes

	Benchmark	BASE	HEAD	Efficiency
❌	pattern_match_constant	121.7 ns	150.8 ns	-19.34%

---

_{Comparing bm/be-474-hashql-take-into-account-terminators-eligibility-when (591383f) with bm/be-455-hashql-create-evaluation-target-coordinator (95af2dc)¹}

Footnotes

1. No successful run was found on bm/be-455-hashql-create-evaluation-target-coordinator (8045f18) during the generation of this report, so bc41524 was used instead as the comparison base. There might be some changes unrelated to this pull request in this report. ↩

[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	$$27.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 136 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.901 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.62 \mathrm{ms} \pm 25.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.700 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1001	$$13.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 103 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.260 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314	$$44.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 324 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.081 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$16.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 190 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.07 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1526	$$25.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 172 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.757 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078	$$29.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 217 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.797 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.87 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.648 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033	$$14.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 106 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.078 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102	$$4.00 \mathrm{ms} \pm 33.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.065 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.21 \mathrm{ms} \pm 30.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.543 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 51	$$3.56 \mathrm{ms} \pm 26.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.03 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269	$$5.39 \mathrm{ms} \pm 25.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.828 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.78 \mathrm{ms} \pm 26.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.259 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 107	$$4.34 \mathrm{ms} \pm 26.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.130 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133	$$4.73 \mathrm{ms} \pm 35.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.652 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.62 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.402 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63	$$4.33 \mathrm{ms} \pm 28.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.790 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2	$$2.90 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.291 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.92 \mathrm{ms} \pm 30.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.977 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1	$$2.97 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.719 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8	$$3.25 \mathrm{ms} \pm 23.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.161 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.02 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.278 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3	$$3.36 \mathrm{ms} \pm 28.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.242 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52	$$3.26 \mathrm{ms} \pm 23.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.203 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.98 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.244 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 25	$$3.14 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.640 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94	$$3.73 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.972 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.29 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.57 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 26	$$3.48 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.790 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66	$$3.69 \mathrm{ms} \pm 36.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.62 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.30 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.908 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29	$$3.60 \mathrm{ms} \pm 31.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.61 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth	1 entities	$$47.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 288 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.93 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	10 entities	$$84.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 455 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.485 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	25 entities	$$51.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 464 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.55 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	5 entities	$$54.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 351 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.555 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	50 entities	$$65.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 508 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.26 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	1 entities	$$49.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 380 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.111 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	10 entities	$$421 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.28 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}-0.152 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	25 entities	$$107 \mathrm{ms} \pm 593 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.15 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	5 entities	$$94.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 483 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.753 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	50 entities	$$300 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.11 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{lightgreen}-9.506 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	1 entities	$$20.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 125 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.654 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	10 entities	$$21.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 175 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.40 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	25 entities	$$21.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 117 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.468 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	5 entities	$$21.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 133 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.17 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	50 entities	$$25.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 140 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.958 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$21.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 150 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.42 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$20.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 118 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.548 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	100 entities	$$20.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 170 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.883 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	1000 entities	$$21.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 208 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.00 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10000 entities	$$27.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 262 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.719 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	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	$$37.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 405 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.99 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1	$$37.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 370 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.18 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1	$$36.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 366 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.189 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1	$$34.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 333 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.090 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2	$$35.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 330 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.308 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1	$$36.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 323 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.903 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1	$$35.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 319 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.922 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1	$$35.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 372 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.825 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1	$$35.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 386 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.985 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id	Account ID: bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba	$$8.92 \mathrm{ms} \pm 51.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.900 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$97.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 781 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.317 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$151 \mathrm{ms} \pm 659 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.213 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$105 \mathrm{ms} \pm 684 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.201 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$115 \mathrm{ms} \pm 933 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.04 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$124 \mathrm{ms} \pm 851 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.325 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$132 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.08 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}-0.386 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$105 \mathrm{ms} \pm 702 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.290 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$135 \mathrm{ms} \pm 634 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.320 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$112 \mathrm{ms} \pm 658 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.420 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$122 \mathrm{ms} \pm 691 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.684 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$125 \mathrm{ms} \pm 730 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.48 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$126 \mathrm{ms} \pm 801 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.70 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
full_test	query-limited	$$133 \mathrm{ms} \pm 657 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.50 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
full_test	query-unlimited	$$142 \mathrm{ms} \pm 589 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.748 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-limited	$$106 \mathrm{ms} \pm 582 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.316 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-unlimited	$$545 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.43 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}-2.774 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

[vercel]

Deployment failed with the following error:

Invalid request: `attribution.gitUser` should NOT have additional property `isBot`.