H-3709, H-3746, H-3747: HaRPC TypeScript implementation

[indietyp]

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

This implements the - to be autogenerated - client for the echo service, squashes some bugs that happened and integrates everything with the hash-api.

The RPC client is gated - like the server implementation - under an environment variable: HASH_RPC_ENABLED = true.

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:

• affected the execution graph, and the turbo.json's have been updated to reflect this

📹 Demo

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 18.85965% with 185 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 22.97%. Comparing base (417362f) to head (29a2539).
Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...harpc/client/typescript/src/binary/MutableBytes.ts	22.53%	55 Missing ⚠️
...@local/harpc/client/typescript/src/net/Response.ts	12.12%	29 Missing ⚠️
libs/@local/graph/sdk/typescript/src/harpc.ts	0.00%	24 Missing ⚠️
...pc/client/typescript/src/net/internal/transport.ts	7.69%	24 Missing ⚠️
...rc/wire-protocol/stream/ResponseFromBytesStream.ts	11.11%	24 Missing ⚠️
.../@local/harpc/client/typescript/src/ClientError.ts	0.00%	11 Missing ⚠️
...ocal/harpc/client/typescript/src/net/Connection.ts	11.11%	8 Missing ⚠️
...s/@local/harpc/client/typescript/src/net/Client.ts	40.00%	6 Missing ⚠️
...ent/typescript/src/wire-protocol/models/Payload.ts	50.00%	1 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
...lient/typescript/src/net/internal/networkLogger.ts	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
... and 1 more

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #5836      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   23.00%   22.97%   -0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         568      571       +3     
  Lines       19160    19300     +140     
  Branches     2715     2732      +17     
==========================================
+ Hits         4408     4435      +27     
- Misses      14700    14812     +112     
- Partials       52       53       +1     

Flag	Coverage Δ
apps.hash-ai-worker-ts	1.32% <ø> (ø)
apps.hash-api	1.16% <ø> (ø)
local.harpc-client	62.15% <21.07%> (-3.04%)	⬇️
local.hash-backend-utils	8.80% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-graph-sdk	58.62% <0.00%> (-41.38%)	⬇️
local.hash-isomorphic-utils	0.99% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-subgraph	24.54% <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.

[indietyp]

I am unsure why CI fails for hash-graph-sdk it works on my machine with 0 issues and the error seems... odd.

Same with the import issue, I might be doing something wrong with the build step, but I am unsure as to what that would be.

[CiaranMn]

Thanks Bilal, exciting to have our first HaRPC call working!

A few small comments

[indietyp]

CI for hash-graph-sdk and I don't know why. @CiaranMn any idea? The lint is passing for harpc-client, but not hash-graph-sdk, for code that resides in harpc-client and linting succeeds locally.

[CiaranMn]

CI for hash-graph-sdk and I don't know why. @CiaranMn any idea? The lint is passing for harpc-client, but not hash-graph-sdk, for code that resides in harpc-client and linting succeeds locally.

I merged in main, if it fails locally now then it's some PR that has merged since you last updated which has caused an issue

[github-actions]

Benchmark results

@rust/hash-graph-benches – Integrations

representative_read_entity

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1	$$16.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 136 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-29.242 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2	$$17.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 209 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.55 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1	$$16.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 177 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.18 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/block/v/1	$$16.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 199 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.542 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1	$$16.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 223 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.949 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1	$$17.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 166 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.27 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1	$$15.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 160 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.419 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1	$$15.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 166 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-31.874 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1	$$15.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 170 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.776 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_property	depths: DT=255, PT=255, ET=255, E=255	$$65.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 271 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.196 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_property	depths: DT=0, PT=0, ET=0, E=0	$$37.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 158 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.056 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_property	depths: DT=2, PT=2, ET=2, E=2	$$55.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 216 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.246 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_property	depths: DT=0, PT=0, ET=0, E=2	$$42.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 176 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.284 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_property	depths: DT=0, PT=0, ET=2, E=2	$$47.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 195 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.264 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_property	depths: DT=0, PT=2, ET=2, E=2	$$52.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 218 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.026 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
link_by_source_by_property	depths: DT=255, PT=255, ET=255, E=255	$$107 \mathrm{ms} \pm 530 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.607 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
link_by_source_by_property	depths: DT=0, PT=0, ET=0, E=0	$$42.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 254 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.291 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
link_by_source_by_property	depths: DT=2, PT=2, ET=2, E=2	$$97.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 481 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.059 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
link_by_source_by_property	depths: DT=0, PT=0, ET=0, E=2	$$80.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 215 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.211 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
link_by_source_by_property	depths: DT=0, PT=0, ET=2, E=2	$$89.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 236 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.894 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
link_by_source_by_property	depths: DT=0, PT=2, ET=2, E=2	$$93.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 413 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.726 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id	Account ID: d4e16033-c281-4cde-aa35-9085bf2e7579	$$1.37 \mathrm{ms} \pm 3.43 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.123 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

scaling_read_entity_complete_one_depth

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	50 entities	$$5.49 \mathrm{s} \pm 827 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{red}1939 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	5 entities	$$26.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 115 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.197 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$20.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 110 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.097 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$36.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 109 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-25.653 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	25 entities	$$178 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.00 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}-2.116 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

scaling_read_entity_linkless

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$1.91 \mathrm{ms} \pm 5.04 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.559 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	100 entities	$$2.07 \mathrm{ms} \pm 7.02 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.812 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$1.92 \mathrm{ms} \pm 4.18 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.373 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	1000 entities	$$3.07 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.66 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10000 entities	$$13.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 53.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.060 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

scaling_read_entity_complete_zero_depth

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	50 entities	$$4.98 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}20.0 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	5 entities	$$1.93 \mathrm{ms} \pm 5.25 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.798 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$1.91 \mathrm{ms} \pm 4.98 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.671 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$2.12 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.284 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	25 entities	$$2.71 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-18.170 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

[sentry-io]

Suspect Issues

This pull request was deployed and Sentry observed the following issues:

• ‼️ Error: invalid ip address GET /rpc/echo View Issue

_{Did you find this useful? React with a 👍 or 👎}