Update GitHub Action hashintel/actions to 58e907d

[hash-dependencies]

This PR contains the following updates:

Package	Type	Update	Change
hashintel/actions (changelog)	action	digest	66c8121 → 58e907d

---

Warning

Some dependencies could not be looked up. Check the Dependency Dashboard for more information.

---

Configuration

📅 Schedule: (UTC)

• Branch creation
  • At any time (no schedule defined)
• Automerge
  • "before 4am every weekday,every weekend"

🚦 Automerge: Enabled.

♻ Rebasing: Whenever PR becomes conflicted, or you tick the rebase/retry checkbox.

🔕 Ignore: Close this PR and you won't be reminded about this update again.

---

• If you want to rebase/retry this PR, check this box

---

This PR has been generated by Mend Renovate CLI.

[vercel]

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

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated
hash	Ready	Preview	Sep 27, 2026 3:36am UTC
hashdotdesign-tokens	Ready	Preview	Sep 27, 2026 3:36am UTC
petrinaut	Ready	Preview	Sep 27, 2026 3:36am UTC
petrinaut-docs	Ready	Preview	Sep 27, 2026 3:36am UTC

[cursor]

PR Summary

Low Risk
Pin-only update to shared CI actions; behavior should match the upstream hashintel/actions changes at the new commit.

Overview
Bumps every pinned reference to the shared hashintel/actions repo from digest 66c8121 to 58e907d (Renovate digest update).

Touches composite actions that encrypt/decrypt sccache credentials, plus reusable workflows for housekeeping (Renovate), preflight (dependencies, PR title, todo comments, actionlint), and release (GitHub App token minting and token encrypt/decrypt). No workflow logic or inputs change—only the action SHA.

^{Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 98e8669. 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 65.90%. Comparing base (6f8e10a) to head (98e8669).

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #9845   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   65.90%   65.90%           
=======================================
  Files        1905     1905           
  Lines      209988   209988           
  Branches     8218     8218           
=======================================
+ Hits       138387   138388    +1     
+ Misses      70052    70051    -1     
  Partials     1549     1549           

Flag	Coverage Δ
antsi	1.96% <ø> (ø)
apps.hash-ai-worker-ts	1.99% <ø> (ø)
apps.hash-api	15.35% <ø> (ø)
blockprotocol.type-system	38.15% <ø> (ø)
error-stack	90.55% <ø> (ø)
harpc-codec	84.61% <ø> (ø)
harpc-net	96.30% <ø> (+0.03%)	⬆️
harpc-tower	67.11% <ø> (ø)
harpc-types	0.00% <ø> (ø)
harpc-wire-protocol	93.85% <ø> (ø)
hash-codec	72.09% <ø> (ø)
hash-config	83.57% <ø> (ø)
hash-graph	14.11% <ø> (ø)
hash-graph-api	33.18% <ø> (ø)
hash-graph-atlas	80.01% <ø> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
hash-graph-authentication	97.34% <ø> (ø)
hash-graph-authorization	67.68% <ø> (ø)
hash-graph-embeddings	91.54% <ø> (ø)
hash-graph-postgres-store	31.94% <ø> (ø)
hash-graph-store	51.71% <ø> (ø)
hash-graph-temporal-versioning	50.53% <ø> (ø)
hash-graph-types	0.00% <ø> (ø)
hash-graph-validation	85.37% <ø> (ø)
hash-middleware	88.93% <ø> (ø)
hashql-ast	90.01% <ø> (ø)
hashql-compiletest	28.71% <ø> (ø)
hashql-core	81.41% <ø> (ø)
hashql-diagnostics	72.85% <ø> (ø)
hashql-eval	79.77% <ø> (ø)
hashql-hir	89.10% <ø> (ø)
hashql-mir	87.22% <ø> (ø)
hashql-syntax-jexpr	94.77% <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)
problematic	89.25% <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.

[codspeed]

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 deps/gha/hashintel-actions-digest (98e8669) with main (6f8e10a)}

[github-actions]

Benchmark results

hash-graph-benches – Integrations

policy_resolution_large

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2002	$$21.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 160 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.768 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.43 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.328 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1002	$$9.70 \mathrm{ms} \pm 72.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.949 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314	$$29.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 321 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.318 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$9.12 \mathrm{ms} \pm 87.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.654 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1527	$$17.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 177 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.591 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078	$$21.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 159 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.043 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.68 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.12 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033	$$10.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 87.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.404 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102	$$2.65 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.452 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.10 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.369 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 52	$$2.38 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.852 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269	$$3.80 \mathrm{ms} \pm 27.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.68 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.48 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.311 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 108	$$2.93 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.046 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133	$$3.17 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.556 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.44 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.02 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63	$$2.93 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.447 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2	$$1.92 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.956 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$1.89 \mathrm{ms} \pm 9.87 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.96 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 2	$$1.98 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.431 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8	$$2.08 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.510 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.00 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.38 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3	$$2.21 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.32 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52	$$2.18 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.410 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$1.97 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.58 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 26	$$2.10 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.80 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94	$$2.45 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.874 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.12 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.275 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 27	$$2.31 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.59 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66	$$2.39 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.094 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.16 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.239 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29	$$2.31 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.60 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth	1 entities	$$24.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 137 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.327 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	10 entities	$$53.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 383 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.924 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	25 entities	$$27.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 162 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.233 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	5 entities	$$31.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 192 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.106 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	50 entities	$$32.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 207 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.848 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	1 entities	$$26.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 161 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.244 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	10 entities	$$309 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.07 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}-1.589 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	25 entities	$$67.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 464 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.250 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	5 entities	$$66.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 429 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.293 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	50 entities	$$200 \mathrm{ms} \pm 758 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.122 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	1 entities	$$7.83 \mathrm{ms} \pm 38.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.675 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	10 entities	$$7.98 \mathrm{ms} \pm 49.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.049 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	25 entities	$$7.99 \mathrm{ms} \pm 39.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.868 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	5 entities	$$7.82 \mathrm{ms} \pm 39.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.587 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	50 entities	$$8.07 \mathrm{ms} \pm 47.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.309 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$7.84 \mathrm{ms} \pm 33.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.959 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$7.88 \mathrm{ms} \pm 41.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.332 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	100 entities	$$7.99 \mathrm{ms} \pm 53.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.30 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	1000 entities	$$7.88 \mathrm{ms} \pm 36.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.247 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10000 entities	$$8.29 \mathrm{ms} \pm 38.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.708 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	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	$$8.17 \mathrm{ms} \pm 41.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.430 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1	$$8.23 \mathrm{ms} \pm 46.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.099 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1	$$8.19 \mathrm{ms} \pm 100 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.140 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1	$$8.23 \mathrm{ms} \pm 41.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.521 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2	$$8.24 \mathrm{ms} \pm 45.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.591 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1	$$8.40 \mathrm{ms} \pm 162 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.51 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1	$$8.20 \mathrm{ms} \pm 48.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.232 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1	$$8.10 \mathrm{ms} \pm 36.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.667 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1	$$8.19 \mathrm{ms} \pm 41.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.375 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id	Account ID: bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba	$$6.01 \mathrm{ms} \pm 30.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.04 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$45.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 335 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.028 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$86.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 491 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.45 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$50.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 395 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.392 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$58.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 481 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.39 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$65.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 408 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.22 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$70.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 353 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.248 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$33.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 184 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.97 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$52.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 364 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.011 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$39.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 241 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.39 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$45.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 223 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.20 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$46.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 315 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.565 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$45.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 260 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.646 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
full_test	query-limited	$$86.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 452 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.71 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
full_test	query-unlimited	$$94.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 414 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.49 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-limited	$$16.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 84.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}22.2 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-unlimited	$$378 \mathrm{ms} \pm 988 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.24 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph