Skip to content
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

test(python): Add benchmark tests for join_where with inequalities #18614

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 9, 2024

Conversation

adamreeve
Copy link
Contributor

This is a follow-up to #18365 to add a couple of benchmarks for the IEJoin algorithm.

These take around 0.01 s using a release build on my machine, compared with around 3 s if doing a cross join then filtering.

@github-actions github-actions bot added internal An internal refactor or improvement python Related to Python Polars labels Sep 9, 2024
Copy link

codecov bot commented Sep 9, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 79.93%. Comparing base (6076421) to head (7b2d44e).
Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #18614      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   79.93%   79.93%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files        1505     1505              
  Lines      202628   202628              
  Branches     2873     2873              
==========================================
- Hits       161976   161967       -9     
- Misses      40104    40113       +9     
  Partials      548      548              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@ritchie46 ritchie46 merged commit aa3b2c3 into pola-rs:main Sep 9, 2024
15 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
internal An internal refactor or improvement python Related to Python Polars
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants