SRE-487: Simplify deployment workflow to staging only and fix image tagging

[TimDiekmann]

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

This PR simplifies the backend deployment workflow by removing production environment variables and focusing only on staging deployments. It also fixes the image tag description in the Docker build action and adds explicit image tags to all Docker builds.

🔍 What does this change?

• Corrects the description for IMAGE_TAG input in the Docker build-push action from "Name of the image within the registry" to "Tag of the image within the registry"
• Removes all production environment variables and deployment steps from the backend CD workflow
• Simplifies environment variable names by removing the "STAGING_" prefix
• Adds explicit "staging" image tags to all Docker builds in the workflow
• Updates the build scripts for Hydra and Kratos in package.json to include explicit image tags

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?

• The CI/CD pipeline itself will validate these changes when deployed

❓ How to test this?

1. Checkout the branch
2. Verify that the CI/CD pipeline completes successfully
3. Confirm that staging deployments work as expected

[cursor]

PR Summary

Medium Risk
Changes CI/CD build and ECS redeploy configuration and removes production deployment steps, so misconfiguration could block deployments or push incorrectly-tagged images, but it does not touch application runtime code.

Overview
Simplifies hash-backend-cd.yml to deploy to staging only by removing the production redeploy steps and consolidating staging env vars (dropping the STAGING_ prefix).

Ensures all images built in the workflow are explicitly tagged as staging (via IMAGE_TAG) and fixes the IMAGE_TAG input description in .github/actions/docker-build-push/action.yml. Also updates external-service build scripts to tag hydra/kratos images as hashintel/hash/*:latest.

^{Written by Cursor Bugbot for commit ee70d29. This will update automatically on new commits. Configure here.}

[vercel]

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

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
hash	Ready	Preview, Comment	Feb 13, 2026 3:55pm
hashdotdesign	Ready	Preview, Comment	Feb 13, 2026 3:55pm
hashdotdesign-tokens	Ready	Preview, Comment	Feb 13, 2026 3:55pm
petrinaut	Ready	Preview	Feb 13, 2026 3:55pm

[TimDiekmann]

• SRE-487: Simplify deployment workflow to staging only and fix image tagging #8417 👈 (View in Graphite)
• main

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

[cursor]

Cursor Bugbot has reviewed your changes and found 1 potential issue.

^{Bugbot Autofix is OFF. To automatically fix reported issues with Cloud Agents, enable Autofix in the Cursor dashboard.}

[augmentcode]

🤖 Augment PR Summary

Summary: Simplifies the backend CD pipeline to deploy to staging only, and standardizes Docker image tagging.

Changes:

• Fixes the IMAGE_TAG input description in the reusable docker-build-push action.
• Removes production-specific environment variables and redeploy steps from hash-backend-cd.yml.
• Renames staging env vars to generic names (e.g., AWS_REGION, APP_CLUSTER_NAME) since the workflow now targets staging only.
• Adds an explicit IMAGE_TAG: staging to all Docker build/push jobs (graph, api, kratos, hydra, workers).
• Updates external-services build scripts for Hydra/Kratos to include explicit image tags when building locally.

Technical Notes: Docker builds continue to also publish sha- and run- tags via the composite action; ECS redeploy steps now consistently reference the unified staging env vars.

_{🤖 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]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 61.05%. Comparing base (c8e4ac9) to head (ee70d29).
⚠️ Report is 4 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #8417   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   61.05%   61.05%           
=======================================
  Files        1247     1247           
  Lines      121606   121606           
  Branches     5267     5267           
=======================================
+ Hits        74245    74246    +1     
+ Misses      46489    46488    -1     
  Partials      872      872           

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.harpc-client	51.24% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-graph-sdk	6.66% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-isomorphic-utils	0.00% <ø> (ø)
rust.antsi	0.00% <ø> (ø)
rust.error-stack	90.88% <ø> (ø)
rust.harpc-codec	84.70% <ø> (ø)
rust.harpc-net	96.16% <ø> (+0.01%)	⬆️
rust.harpc-tower	66.80% <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	2.88% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-authorization	62.34% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-postgres-store	26.80% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-store	39.10% <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	87.25% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-compiletest	46.65% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-core	81.75% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-diagnostics	72.43% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-eval	68.54% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-hir	89.10% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-mir	89.51% <ø> (ø)
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 not alter performance

✅ 21 untouched benchmarks
🗄️ 12 archived benchmarks run¹

---

_{Comparing t/sre-487-prevent-cd-to-automatically-deploy-to-production (ee70d29) with main (c8e4ac9)²}

Footnotes

1. 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. ↩

2. No successful run was found on main (c5edd55) during the generation of this report, so c8e4ac9 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	$$28.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 183 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.325 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.57 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.505 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1001	$$13.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 82.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.11 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314	$$45.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 295 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.272 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$15.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 120 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.310 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1526	$$25.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 173 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.403 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078	$$29.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 154 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.142 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.86 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.345 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033	$$14.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 74.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.295 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102	$$3.96 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.323 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.15 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.281 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 51	$$3.53 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.021 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269	$$5.45 \mathrm{ms} \pm 29.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.483 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.74 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.448 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 107	$$4.38 \mathrm{ms} \pm 26.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.294 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133	$$4.66 \mathrm{ms} \pm 37.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.327 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.62 \mathrm{ms} \pm 24.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.088 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63	$$4.36 \mathrm{ms} \pm 35.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.86 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2	$$2.85 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.386 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.80 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.508 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1	$$2.93 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.602 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8	$$3.22 \mathrm{ms} \pm 22.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.037 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.98 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.662 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3	$$3.30 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.075 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52	$$3.20 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.858 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.91 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.886 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 25	$$3.08 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.433 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94	$$3.66 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.067 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.18 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.556 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 26	$$3.45 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.152 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66	$$3.61 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.714 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.16 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.606 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29	$$3.44 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.241 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth	1 entities	$$41.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 154 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.686 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	10 entities	$$80.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 427 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.004 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	25 entities	$$48.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 219 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.321 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	5 entities	$$50.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 267 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.412 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	50 entities	$$58.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 341 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.762 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	1 entities	$$44.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 191 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.750 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	10 entities	$$424 \mathrm{ms} \pm 798 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.964 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	25 entities	$$101 \mathrm{ms} \pm 492 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.970 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	5 entities	$$89.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 407 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.533 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	50 entities	$$321 \mathrm{ms} \pm 709 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}10.1 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	1 entities	$$16.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 71.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.683 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	10 entities	$$16.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 93.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.263 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	25 entities	$$16.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 68.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.956 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	5 entities	$$16.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 76.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.478 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	50 entities	$$19.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 101 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.71 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$16.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 80.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.280 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$16.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 96.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.667 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	100 entities	$$16.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 108 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.311 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	1000 entities	$$16.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 115 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.494 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10000 entities	$$24.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 151 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.407 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	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	$$32.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 303 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.060 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1	$$32.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 283 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.283 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1	$$32.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 312 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.74 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1	$$31.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 274 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.907 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2	$$32.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 301 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.616 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1	$$32.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 301 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.15 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1	$$32.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 273 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.07 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1	$$33.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 278 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.73 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1	$$31.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 312 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.423 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id	Account ID: bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba	$$8.87 \mathrm{ms} \pm 54.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.311 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$93.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 516 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.227 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$146 \mathrm{ms} \pm 503 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.170 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$101 \mathrm{ms} \pm 581 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.534 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$110 \mathrm{ms} \pm 571 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.27 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$118 \mathrm{ms} \pm 608 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.055 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$125 \mathrm{ms} \pm 587 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.114 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$90.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 440 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.804 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$119 \mathrm{ms} \pm 459 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.868 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$97.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 463 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.953 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$106 \mathrm{ms} \pm 467 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.029 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$108 \mathrm{ms} \pm 460 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.861 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$109 \mathrm{ms} \pm 573 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.443 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
full_test	query-limited	$$132 \mathrm{ms} \pm 569 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-8.612 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
full_test	query-unlimited	$$129 \mathrm{ms} \pm 484 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-10.001 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-limited	$$105 \mathrm{ms} \pm 485 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.515 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-unlimited	$$569 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.17 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.680 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph