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

PERF: regression fixup for timestamp.TimestampConstruction.time_parse_iso8601_tz benchmark #26334

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 12, 2019

Conversation

anmyachev
Copy link
Contributor

  • closes #N/A
  • tests added / passed
  • passes git diff upstream/master -u -- "*.py" | flake8 --diff

For detection details see: #26220 (comment)

The slowdown was due to the use of convert_to_tsobject function.

Asv result:

master patch ratio test_name
31.3±0.5μs 21.9±0.2μs 0.70 timestamp.TimestampConstruction.time_parse_iso8601_tz

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented May 10, 2019

Codecov Report

Merging #26334 into master will decrease coverage by <.01%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #26334      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   92.04%   92.03%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         175      175              
  Lines       52297    52297              
==========================================
- Hits        48137    48134       -3     
- Misses       4160     4163       +3
Flag Coverage Δ
#multiple 90.59% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
#single 40.74% <ø> (-0.13%) ⬇️
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
pandas/io/gbq.py 78.94% <0%> (-10.53%) ⬇️
pandas/core/frame.py 97.01% <0%> (-0.12%) ⬇️
pandas/util/testing.py 90.7% <0%> (+0.1%) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update ee6b131...687590f. Read the comment docs.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented May 10, 2019

Codecov Report

Merging #26334 into master will decrease coverage by <.01%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #26334      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   92.04%   92.03%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         175      175              
  Lines       52292    52292              
==========================================
- Hits        48132    48129       -3     
- Misses       4160     4163       +3
Flag Coverage Δ
#multiple 90.59% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
#single 40.73% <ø> (-0.13%) ⬇️
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
pandas/io/gbq.py 78.94% <0%> (-10.53%) ⬇️
pandas/core/frame.py 97.01% <0%> (-0.12%) ⬇️
pandas/util/testing.py 90.7% <0%> (+0.1%) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 681a22c...40ad4dd. Read the comment docs.

@gfyoung gfyoung added Performance Memory or execution speed performance Datetime Datetime data dtype labels May 10, 2019
@gfyoung
Copy link
Member

gfyoung commented May 10, 2019

@anmyachev : Nice! Can you show the result of the entire benchmark suite?

@anmyachev
Copy link
Contributor Author

@gfyoung
asv continuous -f 1.05 master HEAD -b ^timeseries -b ^timestamp -a warmup_time=1 -a sample_time=1:

master patch ratio test_name
30.9±0.6μs 22.1±0.4μs 0.72 timestamp.TimestampConstruction.time_parse_iso8601_tz

@gfyoung
Copy link
Member

gfyoung commented May 11, 2019

@anmyachev : I meant the entire benchmark suite, just in case.

@jreback jreback added this to the 0.25.0 milestone May 11, 2019
@jreback
Copy link
Contributor

jreback commented May 11, 2019

this looks fine; waiting on CI resolution.

@anmyachev anmyachev force-pushed the fixup_performance branch from 687590f to 40ad4dd Compare May 12, 2019 11:49
@anmyachev
Copy link
Contributor Author

@gfyoung entire benchmark suite will be later.

@jreback jreback merged commit 5049c7f into pandas-dev:master May 12, 2019
@jreback
Copy link
Contributor

jreback commented May 12, 2019

thanks @anmyachev

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Datetime Datetime data dtype Performance Memory or execution speed performance
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants