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
Ensure that MaskedColumn.data returns a plain MaskedArray. #8855
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #8855 +/- ##
=========================================
+ Coverage 86.59% 86.99% +0.4%
=========================================
Files 405 400 -5
Lines 60116 59480 -636
Branches 1100 1100
=========================================
- Hits 52056 51745 -311
+ Misses 7419 7094 -325
Partials 641 641
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
Previously this was instead a masked_BaseColumn, which caused a number of performance hits, e.g., because slicing would go through multiple rounds of ``__array_finalize__``. This includes a regression check for that count.
0272ae6
to
5f99eef
Compare
@taldcroft - as you're upping the performance of |
@mhvk - sorry for the delay, this looks great! Only thing is that the 32-bit fails look real, mostly related to Table in some way, but I can't quite connect the dots. |
32-bit is fortunately not connected - see #8934 |
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.
OK, ignoring the 32-bit fail.
Previously this was instead a masked_BaseColumn, which caused a number of performance hits, e.g., because slicing would go through multiple rounds of
__array_finalize__
. This PR includes a regression check for that count.fixes #6721