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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
[REVIEW] Switch
engine=cudf
to the newJSON
reader #12509[REVIEW] Switch
engine=cudf
to the newJSON
reader #12509Changes from 5 commits
129e692
fff3c25
84705bf
d9266d8
16b29f7
cfbda0b
3016f03
d4d6dd9
8cf3b9a
d880e35
fb32906
0d5b50c
42518a6
e80112f
b6e8569
78b55c0
76b7e10
2641e49
1df85fa
5e0bde4
6c90095
c01e0ff
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
Should this be a hard error or a deprecation warning that replaces the value with
"cudf"
?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.
Since it was experimental, I feel we have the flexibility to make this an error, what do you think?
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 think that's justifiable -- but we'll want to delete this error at some point later. Therefore, it's the same amount of work for us as developers to deprecate it as to force an error. "Add warning, delete warning later" vs. "add error, delete error later."
No strong feelings here - resolve as you see fit.
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.
Will our one-release deprecation policy be enough for this, or do you think a special exception is warranted? If more time is needed, let's try to indicate the release in which support should be removed in the error message or perhaps a code comment.
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.
Yeah, we definitely want to give this a special exception. I don't think we have a specific release decided yet to remove it completely. I updated the comment here.
cc: @GregoryKimball @vuule too.
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 think we'll pick the removal release based on 23.02 feedback. In general, we'll remove the old reader as soon as there are no user issues specific to the new one.
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.
That sounds reasonable! I just wanted to make sure we discussed this topic before merging. 👍