8000 Fix ``Literal`` partitioning in cudf-polars by rjzamora · Pull Request #19160 · rapidsai/cudf · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
Skip to content

Fix Literal partitioning in cudf-polars #19160

New 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

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jun 16, 2025

Conversation

rjzamora
Copy link
Member

Description

Closes #19147

When a Select does not depend on any columns from the child, we must avoid using multiple partitions.

Checklist

  • I am familiar with the Contributing Guidelines.
  • New or existing tests cover these changes.
  • The documentation is up to date with these changes.

@rjzamora rjzamora self-assigned this Jun 13, 2025
@rjzamora rjzamora requested a review from a team as a code owner June 13, 2025 17:46
@rjzamora rjzamora added the bug Something isn't working label Jun 13, 2025
@rjzamora rjzamora requested review from TomAugspurger and vyasr June 13, 2025 17:46
@rjzamora rjzamora added 2 - In Progress Currently a work in progress non-breaking Non-breaking change cudf-polars Issues specific to cudf-polars labels Jun 13, 2025
@github-actions github-actions bot added the Python Affects Python cuDF API. label Jun 13, 2025
@GPUtester GPUtester moved this to In Progress in cuDF Python Jun 13, 2025
Copy link
Contributor
@TomAugspurger TomAugspurger left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good, thanks. Only question would be whether we want a test with multiple partitions hardcoded until #19146 gets in, but I think it's close enough that we're fine.

@rjzamora
Copy link
Member Author

Looks good, thanks. Only question would be whether we want a test with multiple partitions hardcoded until #19146 gets in, but I think it's close enough that we're fine.

Do you have something different than the new test_select_literal in mind? That test will fail without this fix.

@TomAugspurger
Copy link
Contributor

Ah, great. I missed that that module already set a small max_rows_per_partition.

@rjzamora rjzamora added 5 - Ready to Merge Testing and reviews complete, ready to merge and removed 2 - In Progress Currently a work in progress labels Jun 16, 2025
@rjzamora
Copy link
Member Author

/merge

@rapids-bot rapids-bot bot merged commit d4961e1 into rapidsai:branch-25.08 Jun 16, 2025
93 checks passed
@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from In Progress to Done in cuDF Python Jun 16, 2025
@rjzamora rjzamora deleted the rick/bug/19147 branch June 16, 2025 16:21
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
5 - Ready to Merge Testing and reviews complete, ready to merge bug Something isn't working cudf-polars Issues specific to cudf-polars non-breaking Non-breaking change Python Affects Python cuDF API.
Projects
Status: Done
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[BUG]: Duplicate values in unary ops with streaming executor and multiple partitions
2 participants
0