BE-764: Model the public actor as an anonymous caller instead of the nil UUID

[TimDiekmann]

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

Requests without credentials now resolve to an anonymous caller instead of impersonating the nil UUID. Whether a route serves anonymous callers is expressed in the types: authentication chains resolve to ActorId (actor required) or Option<ActorId> (anonymous allowed), and the stores take Option<ActorId> only on the read paths that serve public data.

🔗 Related links

• BE-764 (internal)

🚫 Blocked by

• BE-770: Use the Kratos user-ID lookup on the admin delete-user path #9256

🔍 What does this change?

• AuthenticationProvider is generic over a sealed Caller (ActorId or Option<ActorId>); a chain without a recognized credential resolves through Caller::anonymous(), so the REST chain serves anonymous callers while the admin chain rejects them
• ServiceDelegationProvider treats the service secret as the credential: the delegated actor is resolved against the principal store, the nil UUID reads as "acting for nobody", and a verified secret without a delegated actor fails as the new MissingDelegatedActor
• An actor-ID header without the secret no longer yields 401 — the request resolves as anonymous, since the header alone was never a credential
• Admin router split: /entities/delete and /users/delete authenticate through the chain and require an actor, while the unsafe-dev-endpoints group is gated by the service secret alone
• Store boundary: reads that serve public data take Option<ActorId>; everything else (writes, search, validate/diff/cluster, policy CRUD) requires an actor
• Benches, seeds, the AI worker, and tests act as the system machine — fetched through the secret-gated bootstrap route — instead of the nil UUID
• Removes the unused isEntityPublic GraphQL field, resolver, and query

Pre-Merge Checklist 🚀

🚢 Has this modified a publishable library?

This PR:

• modifies a Cargo-publishable library, but it is not yet ready to publish

📜 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

• authentication_middleware takes the service secret only for the bootstrap routes, so the parameter is unused on the admin chain. Kept for a uniform middleware signature — splitting it buys nothing until the bootstrap routes move onto the admin API (BE-771).

🐾 Next steps

• BE-771: move the bootstrap routes onto the admin API

🛡 What tests cover this?

• Unit tests on the Caller/provider chain, the delegation flow, and the middleware (bootstrap admission, secret gate, extractor behaviour)
• Postgres integration tests for public-actor reads (permit/deny pair, empty permission maps in subgraphs)
• The httpyac suite pins the delegation rejection paths and an anonymous entity query end to end

❓ How to test this?

1. cargo nextest run --package hash-graph-authentication --package hash-graph-api --all-features
2. From tests/graph/http/: yarn reset-database -o none && yarn httpyac send --all tests/service-delegation.http -o none

[vercel]

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

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
hash	Ready	Preview	Aug 24, 2026 6:03pm
petrinaut	Ready	Preview	Aug 24, 2026 6:03pm
petrinaut-docs	Ready	Preview	Aug 24, 2026 6:03pm

1 Skipped Deployment

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
hashdotdesign-tokens	Ignored	Preview	Aug 24, 2026 6:03pm

[codspeed-hq]

Merging this PR will not alter performance

✅ 18 untouched benchmarks
⏩ 80 skipped benchmarks¹

---

_{Comparing t/be-764-model-the-public-actor-as-an-actor-not-as-the-nil-uuid (b187c25) with main (f8d59a0)²}

Footnotes

1. 80 benchmarks were skipped, so the baseline results were used instead. If they were deleted from the codebase, click here and archive them to remove them from the performance reports. ↩

2. No successful run was found on t/be-770-use-the-kratos-user-id-lookup-on-the-admin-delete-user-path (6dd73ab) during the generation of this report, so main (f8d59a0) was used instead as the comparison base. There might be some changes unrelated to this pull request in this report. ↩

[cursor]

PR Summary

Overview
Unable to generate summary.

^{Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit b187c25. Bugbot is set up for automated code reviews on this repo. Configure here.}

[Copilot]

Copilot was unable to review this pull request because the user who requested the review has reached their quota limit.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 63.41162% with 296 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 60.34%. Comparing base (6dd73ab) to head (b187c25).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...cal/graph/postgres-store/src/store/postgres/mod.rs	0.00%	68 Missing ⚠️
libs/@local/graph/api/src/rest/admin.rs	0.00%	27 Missing ⚠️
...s-store/src/store/postgres/knowledge/entity/mod.rs	0.00%	20 Missing ⚠️
libs/@local/graph/api/src/rest/mod.rs	0.00%	14 Missing ⚠️
libs/@local/graph/api/src/rpc/account.rs	0.00%	14 Missing ⚠️
libs/@local/graph/authentication/src/provider.rs	69.76%	11 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
...s-store/src/store/postgres/ontology/entity_type.rs	0.00%	12 Missing ⚠️
libs/@local/graph/store/src/filter/mod.rs	0.00%	12 Missing ⚠️
...res-store/src/store/postgres/ontology/data_type.rs	0.00%	10 Missing ⚠️
libs/@local/graph/api/src/rest/data_type.rs	0.00%	9 Missing ⚠️
... and 29 more

Additional details and impacted files

@@                                           Coverage Diff                                            @@
##           t/be-770-use-the-kratos-user-id-lookup-on-the-admin-delete-user-path    #9259      +/-   ##
========================================================================================================
+ Coverage                                                                 60.27%   60.34%   +0.07%     
========================================================================================================
  Files                                                                      1430     1430              
  Lines                                                                    140642   140960     +318     
  Branches                                                                   6612     6614       +2     
========================================================================================================
+ Hits                                                                      84770    85062     +292     
- Misses                                                                    54794    54819      +25     
- Partials                                                                   1078     1079       +1     

Flag	Coverage Δ
apps.hash-ai-worker-ts	1.99% <0.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
apps.hash-api	14.68% <0.00%> (+0.01%)	⬆️
blockprotocol.type-system	40.84% <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.hash-graph-api	16.94% <71.47%> (+2.98%)	⬆️
rust.hash-graph-authentication	96.09% <92.78%> (-0.36%)	⬇️
rust.hash-graph-authorization	63.02% <0.00%> (+0.43%)	⬆️
rust.hash-graph-embeddings	91.88% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-postgres-store	29.37% <0.00%> (-0.02%)	⬇️
rust.hash-graph-store	46.76% <0.00%> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-types	0.00% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-validation	84.71% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-compiletest	28.39% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-eval	79.82% <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.

[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	$$20.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 154 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.772 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.69 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.900 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1002	$$11.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 64.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.90 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314	$$36.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 350 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.818 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$12.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 123 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.86 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1527	$$20.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 191 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.388 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078	$$22.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 172 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.080 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.95 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.39 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033	$$12.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 106 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.238 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102	$$3.16 \mathrm{ms} \pm 24.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.97 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.39 \mathrm{ms} \pm 23.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.201 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 52	$$2.71 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.280 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269	$$4.28 \mathrm{ms} \pm 29.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.80 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.83 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.209 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 108	$$3.33 \mathrm{ms} \pm 22.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.943 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133	$$3.50 \mathrm{ms} \pm 28.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.36 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.86 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.78 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63	$$3.26 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.54 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2	$$2.15 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.68 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.00 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.885 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 2	$$2.11 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.895 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8	$$2.33 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.279 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.17 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.544 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3	$$2.31 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.472 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52	$$2.50 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.16 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.27 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.97 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 26	$$2.47 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.30 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94	$$2.73 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.524 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.43 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.33 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 27	$$2.56 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.120 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66	$$2.70 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.96 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.41 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.73 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29	$$2.58 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.697 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth	1 entities	$$34.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 195 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.27 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	10 entities	$$28.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 175 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.63 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	25 entities	$$30.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 184 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.48 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	5 entities	$$26.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 169 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.82 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	50 entities	$$35.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 169 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.72 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	1 entities	$$39.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 237 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.19 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	10 entities	$$33.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 249 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.72 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	25 entities	$$74.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 583 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.90 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	5 entities	$$27.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 251 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.864 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	50 entities	$$225 \mathrm{ms} \pm 892 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.175 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	1 entities	$$8.79 \mathrm{ms} \pm 48.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.17 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	10 entities	$$8.79 \mathrm{ms} \pm 53.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.661 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	25 entities	$$8.67 \mathrm{ms} \pm 71.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.311 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	5 entities	$$8.46 \mathrm{ms} \pm 49.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.913 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	50 entities	$$8.70 \mathrm{ms} \pm 61.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.504 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$8.73 \mathrm{ms} \pm 64.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.156 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$8.58 \mathrm{ms} \pm 65.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.780 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	100 entities	$$8.49 \mathrm{ms} \pm 63.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.128 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	1000 entities	$$8.46 \mathrm{ms} \pm 51.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.461 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10000 entities	$$8.91 \mathrm{ms} \pm 61.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.964 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	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	$$9.02 \mathrm{ms} \pm 57.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.265 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1	$$8.88 \mathrm{ms} \pm 51.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.631 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1	$$8.76 \mathrm{ms} \pm 55.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.234 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1	$$8.75 \mathrm{ms} \pm 46.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-7.120 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2	$$9.19 \mathrm{ms} \pm 67.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.152 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1	$$8.88 \mathrm{ms} \pm 59.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.574 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1	$$9.19 \mathrm{ms} \pm 49.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.444 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1	$$8.92 \mathrm{ms} \pm 50.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.717 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1	$$8.70 \mathrm{ms} \pm 44.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.483 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id	Account ID: bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba	$$6.30 \mathrm{ms} \pm 43.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.782 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$52.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 576 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.27 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$92.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 520 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.34 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$57.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 226 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.29 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$65.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 459 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.13 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$73.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 535 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.91 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$77.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 573 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.06 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$37.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 252 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.10 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$59.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 274 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.296 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$42.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 232 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.567 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$49.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 306 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.292 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$51.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 328 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.483 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$52.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 461 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.64 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
full_test	query-limited	$$98.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 474 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.78 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
full_test	query-unlimited	$$106 \mathrm{ms} \pm 366 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.664 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-limited	$$18.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 268 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}20.8 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-unlimited	$$428 \mathrm{ms} \pm 781 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.46 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph