[pick] [data] Rename .cache() to .materialize() (#34169) #34184
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Based on discussion with @c21 @jjyao , as well as the new "MaterializedDatastream" class name, materialize makes more sense as an action than cache. Furthermore, we don't need an is_cached method as the new type information suffices. We will have to pick a variation of this PR into 2.4 as well, which introduces the original fully_executed() -> cache() rename.
ericl
requested review from
gjoliver,
krfricke,
xwjiang2010,
amogkam,
matthewdeng,
Yard1,
maxpumperla,
a team,
scv119,
clarkzinzow,
jjyao,
jianoaix,
c21,
jiaodong and
bveeramani
as code owners
zhe-thoughts
approved these changes
Apr 8, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Based on discussion with @c21 @jjyao , as well as the new "MaterializedDatastream" class name, materialize makes more sense as an action than cache. Furthermore, we don't need an is_cached method as the new type information suffices.
Why are these changes needed?
This picks #34169 into 2.4. We need to do this pick since this is a last minute rename of a new API in 2.4. Otherwise, we'd have to immediately deprecate the API in 2.5.