chore: revert codspeed-cpp back to 1.4.1

[not-matthias]

No description provided.

[github-actions]

Thank you for your submission, we really appreciate it. Like many open-source projects, we ask that you sign our Contributor License Agreement before we can accept your contribution. You can sign the CLA by just posting a Pull Request Comment same as the below format.

---

I have read the CLA Document and I hereby sign the CLA

---

_{You can retrigger this bot by commenting recheck in this Pull Request. Posted by the CLA Assistant Lite bot.}

[codspeed-hq]

Merging this PR will improve performance by 44.2%

⚡ 2 improved benchmarks
✅ 51 untouched benchmarks
🆕 106 new benchmarks
⏩ 2 skipped benchmarks¹

Performance Changes

	Benchmark	BASE	HEAD	Efficiency
🆕	bm_Http_ClientWrapper	N/A	36.3 µs	N/A
⚡	set_append[ApiHeaders]	16.9 ms	11.7 ms	+44.2%
🆕	DrainingRead_SmallChunks_MaxRead_16KB	N/A	370.9 ms	N/A
🆕	bm_Http_FullProtocol	N/A	78.3 µs	N/A
⚡	constructor[ApiHeaders]	97.3 ms	67.6 ms	+44.02%
🆕	DrainingRead_Large_MaxRead_256KB	N/A	237.9 ms	N/A
🆕	bm_Http_Baseline	N/A	11.8 µs	N/A
🆕	bm_Http_OverCapnpLocalCall	N/A	128.8 µs	N/A
🆕	bm_Http_OverCapnpFullRPC	N/A	238.4 µs	N/A
🆕	DrainingRead_SmallChunks_MaxRead_64KB	N/A	370.9 ms	N/A
🆕	DrainingRead_Large_MaxRead_Unlimited	N/A	236.8 ms	N/A
🆕	DrainingRead_Value_MaxRead_16KB	N/A	21.4 ms	N/A
🆕	DrainingRead_Large_MaxRead_64KB	N/A	237.9 ms	N/A
🆕	DrainingRead_SmallChunks_MaxRead_Unlimited	N/A	371.2 ms	N/A
🆕	DrainingRead_Value_MaxRead_Unlimited	N/A	21.4 ms	N/A
🆕	DrainingRead_Value_MaxRead_64KB	N/A	21.4 ms	N/A
🆕	DrainingRead_Value_MaxRead_256KB	N/A	21.4 ms	N/A
🆕	bm_Coro_Pow2_20	N/A	20.8 µs	N/A
🆕	bm_Coro_CoAwait_ImmediateCoroutine	N/A	6.6 µs	N/A
🆕	DrainingRead_Value_MaxRead_1MB	N/A	21.4 ms	N/A
...	...	...	...	...

ℹ️ Only the first 20 benchmarks are displayed. Go to the app to view all benchmarks.

---

_{Comparing latest-runner (8f9cae3) with main (a51c76f)²}

Footnotes

1. 2 benchmarks were skipped, so the baseline results were used instead. If they were deleted from the codebase, click here and archive them to remove them from the performance reports. ↩

2. No successful run was found on main (12a3578) during the generation of this report, so a51c76f was used instead as the comparison base. There might be some changes unrelated to this pull request in this report. ↩