Respect copycols when building DataFrame from Tables.CopiedColumns #2656
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Fixes apache/arrow-julia#146. The issue here
was we were just ignoring
copycols
entirely when building DataFramefrom
Tables.CopiedColumns
. Which is mostly fine becauseCopiedColumns
implies DataFrames can assume ownership of the columns.The wrinkle comes in when you consider cases like
Arrow.Table
, whichwraps columns in
Tables.CopiedColumns
, not necessarily because copieshave been made, but because the data is immutable, so it should be safe
for other tables to assume ownership. The problem is when users want to
mutate those columns, they need to make copies of them, so naturally
users try
DataFrame(::Arrow.Table; copycols=true)
, but then thatdoesn't actually make copies.
The proposal here just intercepts the top-level
DataFrame(::CopiedColumns)
constructor and passescopycols=false
asthe default, so if users pass
copycols=true
, it will still berespected.