Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
feat:
df.apply(axis=1)
to support remote function with mutiple params #851New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
feat:
df.apply(axis=1)
to support remote function with mutiple params #851Changes from all commits
fdee925
5e60089
8b82a14
bf917af
c2d5681
c09a371
c133a5d
faeb9a1
d926cac
267d28b
ea5663d
fcd6f3a
f57e1e3
fd78a9e
be7988d
3f8ebcf
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Don't need to do this in the current pr - but we need to move away from storing ibis values in the op definition. We will want to generate this at compile-time only to allow non-ibis compilation.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ack. b/356686746
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do we want to accept compatible dtypes? eg the column is int, but the function takes decimal?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
function taking decimal is not something we support right now. There is a longer term desire to expand the datatype support.
python-bigquery-dataframes/bigframes/dtypes.py
Line 618 in a7d7197
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Having said that, are there other places where we reconcile dtypes across dataframes or in operations?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
wyh do we need a force_reproject?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I am just copy-pasting the pattern introduced in this change: ff3bb89#diff-8718ceb6a8f6b68d7b06a15e84043fb866c500d5bfb1f33ad8c945f06815a140
Is the reasoning (got a bit detached unintentionally, sitting at the beginning of the function) still valid?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actually it does make a difference, quickly tested in #874 and
series.mask
doctest is failingThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I moved the comment back close to reproject, PTAL