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	May 13, 2026 10:06am
petrinaut	Ready	Preview	May 13, 2026 10:06am

2 Skipped Deployments

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
hashdotdesign	Ignored	Preview	May 13, 2026 10:06am
hashdotdesign-tokens	Ignored	Preview	May 13, 2026 10:06am

[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-513: HashQL: Rework dynamic aggregate size estimation #8697
• BE-512: HashQL: Allow cross-backend transitions for SwitchInt terminators #8696
• BE-524: HashQL: Remove island schedule module #8694
• BE-525: HashQL: Remove implicit type-widening from Integer operations, and make comparison size aware #8693
• BE-515: HashQL: Remove OFFSET 0 materialization fence from generated query #8650
• BE-514: HashQL: implement iterative adjustment passes in placement solver #8635
• BE-500, BE-501: HashQL: Unify mixed parameter resolution in data dependency analysis #8607
• 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-523: HashQL: Suspendable interpreter with structured values and input system #8675
• BE-522: HashQL: Expand stdlib type system with temporal types #8674
• 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

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 62.86%. Comparing base (8218a99) to head (a2dcffd).

Additional details and impacted files

@@                                    Coverage Diff                                    @@
##           bm/be-455-hashql-create-evaluation-target-coordinator    #8587      +/-   ##
=========================================================================================
- Coverage                                                  62.91%   62.86%   -0.05%     
=========================================================================================
  Files                                                       1379     1379              
  Lines                                                     141855   141686     -169     
  Branches                                                    5848     5846       -2     
=========================================================================================
- Hits                                                       89244    89070     -174     
- Misses                                                     51678    51682       +4     
- Partials                                                     933      934       +1     

Flag	Coverage Δ
apps.hash-ai-worker-ts	1.41% <ø> (ø)
apps.hash-api	0.00% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-backend-utils	2.81% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-graph-sdk	9.63% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-isomorphic-utils	0.00% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-api	2.52% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-ast	87.23% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-compiletest	28.26% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-eval	79.60% <ø> (-0.10%)	⬇️
rust.hashql-hir	89.06% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-syntax-jexpr	94.06% <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

✅ 80 untouched benchmarks

---

_{Comparing bm/be-474-hashql-take-into-account-terminators-eligibility-when (a2dcffd) with bm/be-455-hashql-create-evaluation-target-coordinator (8218a99)}

[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`.

[augmentcode]

🤖 Augment PR Summary

Summary: Updates HashQL execution planning so backend placement accounts for whether a block’s terminator can run on a target (and what it costs), not just the block’s statements.

Changes:

• Adds `FiniteBitSet::is_superset` / `is_subset` helpers (with tests) to compare target domains.
• Introduces per-block TerminatorCostVec and threads terminator costs through statement placement, block splitting, and cost aggregation.
• Extends basic-block splitting to optionally peel off a dedicated “terminator region” when terminator support is narrower/incomparable vs the last statement region.
• Ensures synthesized split-chain Goto terminators get zero terminator cost via TerminatorCostVec::remap tests.
• Renames/clarifies transition-matrix costs to TerminatorTransitionCostVec for the solver/AC-3 path, separating “transition costs” from “terminator execution costs”.
• Updates MIR text formatting to support terminator annotations, and refreshes UI/snapshot expectations accordingly.
• Adjusts eval UI postgres outputs to reflect updated planning/continuation SQL generation.

Notes: This touches core placement/solver inputs (domains, splitting, cost aggregation), so correctness hinges on terminator eligibility being represented consistently across targets and after splitting.

_{🤖 Was this summary useful? React with 👍 or 👎}

[augmentcode]

Review completed. 2 suggestions posted.

Comment augment review to trigger a new review at any time.

[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.}

^{Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit a2dcffd. Configure here.}

[cursor]

Orchestrator UI tests skipped with updated expected outputs

Medium Severity

A new .spec.toml with skip = true is added for the orchestrator UI test suite, while filter-false.stdout and simple-read.stdout are simultaneously updated with significant behavioral changes (filter rows no longer received, target changed from interpreter to postgres, new continuation lines). Because the tests are skipped, these expected-output updates are never actually verified against the real runtime output. If the actual behavior differs from the updated .stdout files, the discrepancy will go undetected.

Additional Locations (2)

• libs/@local/hashql/eval/tests/ui/orchestrator/jsonc/filter-false.stdout#L1-L3
• libs/@local/hashql/eval/tests/ui/orchestrator/jsonc/simple-read.stdout#L1-L38

 

^{Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit a2dcffd. Configure here.}