You were right — my previous wording was too focused on the all-pairs N² case, which is not the way pairwise patch systems are usually deployed.
I updated the benchmark to compare CAVS against more practical patch policies, including adjacent-only updates, skip-heavy scenarios, warm-cache cases, and replayable patch graphs. The new results are now documented in docs/results/v1.1.0/patch-policy/ and summarized in BENCHMARKS.md.
The goal is no longer to frame pairwise diffs as “bad because N²”, but to compare CAVS against realistic policies and show the tradeoffs in storage, update size, skipped-version behavior, apply path length, and cache reuse.
Thanks again for pointing this out — it made the benchmark much better.