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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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
Improve performance for cudf::strings::count_characters for long strings #12779
Improve performance for cudf::strings::count_characters for long strings #12779
Changes from 18 commits
d0542d0
782ead7
d097b2e
d6b04f2
4e5030d
3cf9dd1
8e2f8d9
2d6a2ba
219563e
4dc1cd4
390242f
3a70d09
bb78362
d7562cd
440fe8b
bcb4cc0
85a3594
bd1c7d9
e110492
3f270ba
9f997e9
e30e067
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.
I expected that these tests should all be using
cudf::size_type
for the counts, but I also see thatcount_characters
is defined to return anINT32
in its docstring. That seems undesirable, right? Shouldn't we be usingcudf::size_type
instead of hardcodingint32_t
for the function return value and test comparisons?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 there is no
SIZE_TYPE
column type, I think it is more correct to use the appropriate data type.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.
If changing the definition of size type would affect the correctness or consistency of this code, we should use size type.
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 disagree but this seems out of scope for this PR.
There are at least 6 APIs that do this today.
Perhaps you can create a separate issue if you want to reopen the discussion.
We document what data-type is used for the output of the column of these APIs.
I'm not comfortable saying the column type is whatever size-type equates to at the moment.
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.
Discussed a bit offline. The latest documented status is #3958 (comment) but from conversation since that was posted, @GregoryKimball seemed interested in moving towards option 3. I won't hold this PR up on that account.