-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 180
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
[FEAT] implement range operation and data streaming #3267
Conversation
CodSpeed Performance ReportMerging #3267 will improve performances by 19.73%Comparing Summary
Benchmarks breakdown
|
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.
overall looks good to me, a few minor suggestions and comments.
src/daft-local-execution/src/run.rs
Outdated
@@ -92,6 +124,9 @@ impl NativeExecutor { | |||
results_buffer_size, | |||
) | |||
})?; | |||
|
|||
let out = BlockingStreamIter::new(out); |
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.
can you add a comment on why we need to block here?
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 not completely sure but aren't we not leveraging python async really? → we are just blocking for a task to complete
src/daft-logical-plan/src/optimization/rules/eliminate_cross_join.rs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #3267 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 77.54% 77.58% +0.04%
==========================================
Files 659 664 +5
Lines 80565 80798 +233
==========================================
+ Hits 62473 62689 +216
- Misses 18092 18109 +17
|
Co-authored-by: Cory Grinstead <cory.grinstead@gmail.com>
4c1507e
to
9c26532
Compare
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.
This looks mostly fine to me. I think some function/struct names could be clearer to better express their purpose - but that's just my opinion.
will do in future PRs |
No description provided.