Bitfield Docs

Every number here names the work category. That is the only honest way to compare speed.

You want the headline numbers, but you also want to know what each number is allowed to mean.

Number

The value and unit from the claim row.

What these numbers do not say

They do not say cold storage is sub-nanosecond.
They do not say the internet has zero cost.
They do not say every database benchmark measures the same job.
They do not say one isolated write and a full batch have the same wall-clock shape.

For the field-level contract behind each row, read the claim ledger.

Each envelope is the full public shape of the claim. Quote the envelope, not just the number.

Claim ID	Public value	Measured job	Public mechanism category	Safe comparison	Do not compare with	Non-claims
`h0-warm-local-read`	`0.68` nanoseconds per read	`warm-local-read`	`memory-mapped-local-read`, `content-addressed-storage`	Other warm local reads where the needed bytes are already available locally	Cold disk reads, networked database queries, unrelated benchmark jobs	Not a cold disk read; not a disappearing network trip; not proof that every database benchmark measures the same job
`h1-hash-lookup`	`91.7` nanoseconds per lookup	`content-address-lookup`	`content-addressed-storage`	Other local content identity lookup paths	Exact-position reads with no lookup step, networked app latency	Not the same category as the H0 exact read; not networked application latency
`durable-batch-write-8190`	`316` nanoseconds per written item	`durable-batch-write`	`durable-append-path`	Other saved batch writes with a similar durability boundary	One isolated network write, vendor rows that include different durability or network work	Not every isolated write wall-clock latency; not the same category as a networked managed database write
`current-batched-write-ceiling`	`0.59` nanoseconds per written item	`batched-write-ceiling`	`durable-append-path`	Other optimized full-batch ceiling rows	Every saved write path, every vendor write benchmark	Not every full saved write; not a universal write comparison row

Use this shape:

Bitfield measured <value> <unit> for <category>. That row is about <mechanism category>. It does not claim <main non-claim>.

Do not use this shape:

Bitfield is <value> fast.

The second version removes the measured job. Once the measured job is gone, the number becomes easier to misuse.

Failure	Why it is wrong	Fix
Quoting only the number	The category disappears	Quote number plus category
Removing non-claims	The claim gets overread	Keep the boundary sentence with the row
Comparing batch ceiling to every write	Ceiling is not every write	Use the durable batch row for saved-write comparisons
Adding a number not in the ledger	The public source of truth splits	Add the claim-ledger row first