BE-826: Load explicit TOML files in hash-config by TimDiekmann · Pull Request #9553 · hashintel/hash

TimDiekmann · 2026-09-06T13:40:02Z

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

Allow HASH applications to load required TOML files on top of programmatic defaults. Files have predictable precedence, and failures identify the source without including rejected values or TOML source excerpts.

🔗 Related links

BE-826: Load explicit TOML files in hash-config (internal)
H-4170: Introduce config file for HASH (internal)

🚫 Blocked by

None.

🔍 What does this change?

Add repeatable Loader::with_toml_file(path), with file reads deferred until load.
Apply every file above all defaults, regardless of builder-call order. Later files replace scalars and arrays; maps merge recursively.
Add typed read and parse errors. Read failures retain their I/O cause; malformed TOML reports its path and position without retaining the parser error or source excerpt.
Derive LoadError display messages and document the API with an executable file example.

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:

require changes to docs which are made as part of this PR

🕸️ Does this require a change to the Turbo Graph?

The changes in this PR:

do not affect the execution graph

⚠️ Known issues

This slice accepts required TOML files only. Profiles, discovery, optional files, other formats, environment variables, CLI integration, and a public provenance API are outside its scope.

🐾 Next steps

Choose the next configuration source or inspection feature as a separate, small change.

🛡 What tests cover this?

Eleven file integration tests cover deferred reads, precedence, merging, correction of an earlier mistyped value, empty file layers, missing files, directories, invalid UTF-8, malformed TOML, invalid values, and missing required fields.
Six Insta snapshots check complete error reports alongside typed error assertions and checks that rejected values are absent before snapshot normalization.
yarn workspace @rust/hash-config test:unit passes all 30 tests, including snapshots, and both executable doctests.
Clippy with all features/targets and warnings denied, Rustdoc generation, and git diff --check pass.

❓ How to test this?

Run yarn workspace @rust/hash-config test:unit.
Run cargo clippy --package hash-config --all-features --all-targets --no-deps -- -D warnings.

📹 Demo

Given hash-graph.toml:

host = "localhost"

#[derive(serde::Deserialize)]
struct Config {
    host: String,
    port: u16,
}

let config = hash_config::Loader::new()
    .with_defaults(serde_json::json!({ "port": 5432 }))
    .with_toml_file("hash-graph.toml")
    .load::<Config>()?;

assert_eq!(config.host, "localhost");
assert_eq!(config.port, 5432);

vercel · 2026-09-06T13:40:08Z

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

4 Skipped Deployments

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated
hash	Ignored	Preview	Sep 6, 2026 7:55pm UTC
hashdotdesign-tokens	Ignored	Preview	Sep 6, 2026 7:55pm UTC
petrinaut	Skipped		Sep 6, 2026 7:55pm UTC
petrinaut-docs	Skipped		Sep 6, 2026 7:55pm UTC

cursor · 2026-09-06T13:40:11Z

PR Summary

Low Risk
Changes are confined to the internal hash-config crate with extensive tests; no app wiring yet, though misconfigured required file paths will fail startup once consumers adopt the API.

Overview
hash-config can now stack required TOML files on top of programmatic defaults via Loader::with_toml_file. Reads happen at load, not when the path is registered.

Precedence: every file layer beats all defaults, independent of builder call order. Among files, later entries override scalars and whole arrays; nested maps still merge. load merges defaults first, then each file in registration order.

Errors: LoadError adds ReadFile and ParseFile (with path), uses derive_more for display text, and keeps diagnostics safe to log—rejected values and TOML excerpts stay out of reports. Malformed TOML only attaches line/column, not the parser error or source text.

Coverage includes integration tests for precedence, multi-file merge, deferred read, and failure modes, plus Insta snapshots for full error output; existing default-layer tests now use assert_matches! on LoadError.

^{Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 92c0150. Bugbot is set up for automated code reviews on this repo. Configure here.}

Copilot

🟢 Approval recommended

The reviewed changes have comprehensive coverage and no unresolved issues.

Pull request overview

Adds deferred TOML file loading to hash-config with deterministic precedence and redacted diagnostics.

Changes:

Adds repeatable Loader::with_file.
Introduces typed read and parse errors.
Adds integration and snapshot coverage.

File summaries

File	Description
`libs/@local/config/tests/snapshots/files__file_non_utf8.snap`	Captures invalid UTF-8 diagnostics.
`libs/@local/config/tests/snapshots/files__file_missing.snap`	Captures missing-file diagnostics.
`libs/@local/config/tests/snapshots/files__file_missing_required_value.snap`	Captures missing-field diagnostics.
`libs/@local/config/tests/snapshots/files__file_malformed_redaction.snap`	Captures redacted parse diagnostics.
`libs/@local/config/tests/snapshots/files__file_invalid_value.snap`	Captures invalid-value diagnostics.
`libs/@local/config/tests/snapshots/files__file_directory.snap`	Captures directory-read diagnostics.
`libs/@local/config/tests/files.rs`	Tests precedence, merging, errors, and redaction.
`libs/@local/config/src/lib.rs`	Integrates and documents file-backed loading.
`libs/@local/config/src/file.rs`	Implements TOML reading and parsing.
`libs/@local/config/src/error.rs`	Adds typed file errors.
`libs/@local/config/Cargo.toml`	Adds implementation and test dependencies.
`Cargo.lock`	Records resolved dependency changes.

Review details

Files reviewed: 11/12 changed files
Comments generated: 0
Review effort level: Balanced

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

codecov · 2026-09-06T13:43:13Z

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 91.17647% with 3 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 60.89%. Comparing base (eea4e1f) to head (92c0150).
⚠️ Report is 18 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
libs/@local/config/src/file.rs	92.00%	1 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
libs/@local/config/src/lib.rs	88.88%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #9553   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   60.89%   60.89%           
=======================================
  Files        1461     1462    +1     
  Lines      146725   146754   +29     
  Branches     6744     6744           
=======================================
+ Hits        89343    89373   +30     
+ Misses      56264    56262    -2     
- Partials     1118     1119    +1

Flag	Coverage Δ
rust.hash-config	`78.41% <91.17%> (+3.66%)`	⬆️

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 · 2026-09-06T13:47:41Z

Merging this PR will not alter performance

⚠️

6 benchmarks measured no execution time

Nothing ran under measurement, usually because the compiler removed the code under test. These results are not comparable, so they count as unchanged.

Preventing compiler optimizations

✅ 98 untouched benchmarks

Performance Changes

	Benchmark	`BASE`	`HEAD`	Efficiency
⚠️	`as_constant`	< 1 ns	< 1 ns	N/A
⚠️	`constant_equal`	< 1 ns	< 1 ns	N/A
⚠️	`constant_not_equal`	< 1 ns	< 1 ns	N/A
⚠️	`access`	< 1 ns	< 1 ns	N/A
⚠️	`runtime_equal`	< 1 ns	< 1 ns	N/A
⚠️	`runtime_not_equal`	< 1 ns	< 1 ns	N/A

_{Comparing t/codex/be-826-load-explicit-toml-files-in-hash-config (92c0150) with main (8828644)}

github-actions · 2026-09-06T21:05:15Z

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	$$27.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 246 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.28 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.58 \mathrm{ms} \pm 31.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.144 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1002	$$12.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 91.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-8.277 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314	$$43.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 346 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.798 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$15.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 135 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.174 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1527	$$25.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 198 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.078 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078	$$27.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 208 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.60 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.73 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.507 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033	$$14.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 109 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.456 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102	$$3.82 \mathrm{ms} \pm 30.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.815 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.05 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.969 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 52	$$3.44 \mathrm{ms} \pm 24.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.917 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269	$$5.17 \mathrm{ms} \pm 36.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.055 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.60 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.703 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 108	$$4.13 \mathrm{ms} \pm 26.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.150 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133	$$4.52 \mathrm{ms} \pm 30.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.400 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.60 \mathrm{ms} \pm 45.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.796 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63	$$4.29 \mathrm{ms} \pm 30.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.980 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2	$$2.80 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.939 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.76 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.38 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 2	$$2.85 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.455 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8	$$3.08 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.346 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.98 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.32 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3	$$3.17 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.247 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52	$$3.18 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.74 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.81 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.805 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 26	$$3.02 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.336 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94	$$3.50 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.038 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.10 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.40 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 27	$$3.31 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.118 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66	$$3.44 \mathrm{ms} \pm 24.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.57 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.12 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.81 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29	$$3.44 \mathrm{ms} \pm 28.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.16 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth	1 entities	$$31.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 171 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.488 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	10 entities	$$69.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 499 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.94 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	25 entities	$$35.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 348 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.186 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	5 entities	$$38.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 455 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.18 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	50 entities	$$40.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 214 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.428 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	1 entities	$$32.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 168 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.314 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	10 entities	$$411 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.15 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}4.66 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	25 entities	$$94.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 591 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.79 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	5 entities	$$70.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 392 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.519 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	50 entities	$$311 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.39 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{red}12.4 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	1 entities	$$10.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 71.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.43 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	10 entities	$$10.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 71.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.78 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	25 entities	$$10.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 77.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.65 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	5 entities	$$10.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 66.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.64 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	50 entities	$$10.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 74.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.624 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$10.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 67.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.918 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$10.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 72.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.01 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	100 entities	$$10.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 57.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.55 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	1000 entities	$$10.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 73.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.49 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10000 entities	$$10.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 61.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.99 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	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`	$$11.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 64.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.84 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1`	$$11.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 68.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}10.0 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1`	$$11.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 73.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.52 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1`	$$11.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 72.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.27 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2`	$$11.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 80.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.49 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1`	$$11.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 132 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}9.87 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1`	$$10.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 68.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.078 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1`	$$10.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 59.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.97 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1`	$$10.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 64.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.626 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id	Account ID: `bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba`	$$7.95 \mathrm{ms} \pm 67.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.70 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$59.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 719 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.36 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$117 \mathrm{ms} \pm 992 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}11.4 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$64.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 624 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.32 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$70.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 424 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.287 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$79.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 436 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.988 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$90.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 687 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.47 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$49.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 373 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}9.90 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$84.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 539 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}15.8 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$59.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 442 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}15.7 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$67.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 461 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}12.9 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$72.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 469 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}16.0 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$71.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 429 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}11.9 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
full_test	query-limited	$$122 \mathrm{ms} \pm 523 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.372 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
full_test	query-unlimited	$$134 \mathrm{ms} \pm 475 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.960 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-limited	$$23.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 145 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.697 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-unlimited	$$539 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.08 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}-0.395 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

Load explicit TOML files in hash-config

281a2ec

Copilot AI balanced review requested due to automatic review settings September 6, 2026 13:40

github-actions Bot added area/deps Relates to third-party dependencies (area) area/libs Relates to first-party libraries/crates/packages (area) type/eng > backend Owned by the @backend team area/tests New or updated tests labels Sep 6, 2026

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of TimDiekmann September 6, 2026 13:40 View session

TimDiekmann deployed to pull-request September 6, 2026 13:40 — with GitHub Actions Active

graphite-app Bot assigned TimDiekmann Sep 6, 2026

vercel Bot deployed to Preview – hashdotdesign-tokens September 6, 2026 13:41 View deployment

Copilot AI reviewed Sep 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

vercel Bot deployed to Preview – petrinaut-docs September 6, 2026 13:44 View deployment

vercel Bot deployed to Preview – petrinaut September 6, 2026 13:44 View deployment

Name TOML file loading explicitly and cover merge edge cases

e569319

vercel Bot temporarily deployed to Preview – petrinaut September 6, 2026 13:51 Inactive

vercel Bot temporarily deployed to Preview – petrinaut-docs September 6, 2026 13:51 Inactive

TimDiekmann deployed to pull-request September 6, 2026 13:52 — with GitHub Actions Active

vercel Bot deployed to Preview – hash September 6, 2026 14:02 View deployment

indietyp reviewed Sep 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread libs/@local/config/src/file.rs

Store configuration file paths in load errors

92c0150

vercel Bot temporarily deployed to Preview – petrinaut September 6, 2026 19:55 Inactive

vercel Bot temporarily deployed to Preview – petrinaut-docs September 6, 2026 19:55 Inactive

TimDiekmann deployed to pull-request September 6, 2026 19:55 — with GitHub Actions Active

TimDiekmann requested a review from indietyp September 6, 2026 20:12

indietyp approved these changes Sep 7, 2026

View reviewed changes

TimDiekmann enabled auto-merge September 7, 2026 10:07

TimDiekmann added this pull request to the merge queue Sep 7, 2026

Merged via the queue into main with commit 23b4c0b Sep 7, 2026
220 checks passed

TimDiekmann deleted the t/codex/be-826-load-explicit-toml-files-in-hash-config branch September 7, 2026 10:28

TimDiekmann mentioned this pull request Sep 7, 2026

H-4170: Load optional TOML files in hash-config #9566

Merged

3 tasks

Navigation Menu

Uh oh!

BE-826: Load explicit TOML files in hash-config - #9553

BE-826: Load explicit TOML files in hash-config#9553
TimDiekmann merged 3 commits into
mainfrom
t/codex/be-826-load-explicit-toml-files-in-hash-config

TimDiekmann commented Sep 6, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

vercel Bot commented Sep 6, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

cursor Bot commented Sep 6, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented Sep 6, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

codspeed-hq Bot commented Sep 6, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Sep 6, 2026

@rust/hash-graph-benches – Integrations

policy_resolution_large

policy_resolution_medium

policy_resolution_none

policy_resolution_small

read_scaling_complete

read_scaling_linkless

representative_read_entity

representative_read_entity_type

representative_read_multiple_entities

scenarios

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

Uh oh!

Conversation

TimDiekmann commented Sep 6, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

🔗 Related links

🚫 Blocked by

🔍 What does this change?

Pre-Merge Checklist 🚀

🚢 Has this modified a publishable library?

📜 Does this require a change to the docs?

🕸️ Does this require a change to the Turbo Graph?

⚠️ Known issues

🐾 Next steps

🛡 What tests cover this?

❓ How to test this?

📹 Demo

Uh oh!

vercel Bot commented Sep 6, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

cursor Bot commented Sep 6, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

PR Summary

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

🟢 Approval recommended

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented Sep 6, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

codspeed-hq Bot commented Sep 6, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Merging this PR will not alter performance

Performance Changes

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Sep 6, 2026

Benchmark results

@rust/hash-graph-benches – Integrations

policy_resolution_large

policy_resolution_medium

policy_resolution_none

policy_resolution_small

read_scaling_complete

read_scaling_linkless

representative_read_entity

representative_read_entity_type

representative_read_multiple_entities

scenarios

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

TimDiekmann commented Sep 6, 2026 •

edited

Loading

vercel Bot commented Sep 6, 2026 •

edited

Loading

cursor Bot commented Sep 6, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov Bot commented Sep 6, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codspeed-hq Bot commented Sep 6, 2026 •

edited

Loading