Update Rust crate tokio-util to v0.7.18

[hash-worker]

This PR contains the following updates:

Package	Type	Update	Change
tokio-util (source)	workspace.dependencies	patch	0.7.17 -> 0.7.18

---

Warning

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

---

Release Notes

tokio-rs/tokio (tokio-util)

v0.7.18

Compare Source

---

Configuration

📅 Schedule: Branch creation - "before 4am every weekday,every weekend" (UTC), Automerge - At any time (no schedule defined).

🚦 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 Renovate Bot.

[cursor]

PR Summary

Patch bump of tokio-util in Cargo.lock.

• Updates tokio-util from 0.7.17 to 0.7.18 with new checksum
• No source code changes, lockfile-only update

^{Written by Cursor Bugbot for commit 7c1cd57. This will update automatically on new commits. Configure here.}

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 59.18%. Comparing base (2a2257a) to head (7c1cd57).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #8275   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   59.17%   59.18%           
=======================================
  Files        1208     1208           
  Lines      113805   113805           
  Branches     5029     5029           
=======================================
+ Hits        67340    67350   +10     
+ Misses      45672    45664    -8     
+ Partials      793      791    -2     

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	10.88% <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	96.32% <ø> (+0.15%)	⬆️
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	2.89% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-authorization	62.47% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-postgres-store	25.61% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-store	30.54% <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	81.63% <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	87.63% <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

✅ 17 untouched benchmarks
🗄️ 12 archived benchmarks run¹

---

_{Comparing deps/rs/tokio-util-0.x-lockfile (7c1cd57) with main (75dfdf3)}

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. ↩

[augmentcode]

🤖 Augment PR Summary

Summary: Bumps the Rust workspace dependency tokio-util from 0.7.17 to 0.7.18.
Why: Keeps the dependency current with the latest upstream patch-level fixes and improvements.

_{🤖 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.

[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	$$25.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 142 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.267 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.21 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.023 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1001	$$11.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 77.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.433 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314	$$41.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 261 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.372 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$13.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 73.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.06 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1526	$$23.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 135 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.461 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078	$$29.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 206 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-29.112 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.56 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-82.017 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033	$$13.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 82.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-51.000 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102	$$3.59 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.017 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.80 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.963 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 51	$$3.15 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.703 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269	$$4.94 \mathrm{ms} \pm 27.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.135 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.35 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.946 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 107	$$3.91 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.239 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133	$$4.13 \mathrm{ms} \pm 22.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.06 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.24 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.815 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63	$$3.83 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.442 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2	$$2.53 \mathrm{ms} \pm 9.97 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.27 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.47 \mathrm{ms} \pm 8.84 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.43 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1	$$2.58 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.09 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8	$$2.74 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.56 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.64 \mathrm{ms} \pm 7.89 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.73 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3	$$2.85 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.16 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52	$$2.80 \mathrm{ms} \pm 9.68 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.38 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.54 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.53 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 25	$$2.71 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.76 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94	$$3.17 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.74 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.78 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.64 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 26	$$2.96 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.12 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66	$$3.08 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.30 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.74 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.97 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29	$$3.01 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.18 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth	1 entities	$$38.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 122 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.073 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	10 entities	$$76.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 319 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.365 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	25 entities	$$43.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 149 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.12 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	5 entities	$$45.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 146 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.507 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	50 entities	$$53.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 229 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.71 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	1 entities	$$40.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 166 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.171 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	10 entities	$$421 \mathrm{ms} \pm 813 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.405 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	25 entities	$$94.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 399 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.10 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	5 entities	$$85.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 305 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.937 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	50 entities	$$278 \mathrm{ms} \pm 732 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.158 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	1 entities	$$14.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 54.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.92 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	10 entities	$$14.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 73.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.86 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	25 entities	$$15.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 55.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.41 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	5 entities	$$14.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 67.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.708 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	50 entities	$$17.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 77.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.95 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$14.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 65.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.254 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$14.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 51.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.730 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	100 entities	$$14.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 57.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.57 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	1000 entities	$$15.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 73.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.52 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10000 entities	$$21.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 132 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.431 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	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	$$29.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 254 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.359 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1	$$30.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 282 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.54 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1	$$28.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 269 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.383 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1	$$29.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 229 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.005 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2	$$29.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 247 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.484 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1	$$29.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 253 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.793 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1	$$30.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 299 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.33 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1	$$29.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 297 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.61 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1	$$28.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 290 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-7.086 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id	Account ID: bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba	$$7.99 \mathrm{ms} \pm 34.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.732 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$45.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 204 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.717 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$92.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 336 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.243 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$51.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 261 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.103 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$59.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 357 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.410 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$68.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 335 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.04 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$73.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 311 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.446 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$49.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 189 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.089 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$76.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 402 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.07 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$56.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 267 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.916 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$63.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 302 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.214 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$65.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 346 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.593 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$65.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 338 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.159 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
full_test	query-limited	$$135 \mathrm{ms} \pm 479 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.969 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
full_test	query-unlimited	$$131 \mathrm{ms} \pm 506 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.788 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-limited	$$38.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 236 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-62.696 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-unlimited	$$592 \mathrm{ms} \pm 918 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.548 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph