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

Pin numba version #13001

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Mar 23, 2023
Merged

Pin numba version #13001

merged 2 commits into from
Mar 23, 2023

Conversation

vyasr
Copy link
Contributor

@vyasr vyasr commented Mar 23, 2023

Description

Changes in the upcoming numba 0.57 release will break cudf until we've had time to adapt them, which will not happen in 23.04.

Checklist

  • I am familiar with the Contributing Guidelines.
  • New or existing tests cover these changes.
  • The documentation is up to date with these changes.

@vyasr vyasr added 3 - Ready for Review Ready for review by team improvement Improvement / enhancement to an existing function non-breaking Non-breaking change labels Mar 23, 2023
@vyasr vyasr requested a review from a team as a code owner March 23, 2023 17:33
@vyasr vyasr self-assigned this Mar 23, 2023
@vyasr vyasr requested review from a team as code owners March 23, 2023 17:33
@github-actions github-actions bot added conda Python Affects Python cuDF API. labels Mar 23, 2023
dependencies.yaml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Contributor

@gmarkall gmarkall left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

There were some CUDA-related fixes for extensions that went into Numba 0.56.4 - while we're here could / should we bump it to >=0.56.4,<0.57?

FWIW, <0.57 looks like the correct upper bound to me from a Numba standpoint but I can't vouch for the changes (whether there's other locations that need changing in cudf).

@bdice
Copy link
Contributor

bdice commented Mar 23, 2023

@gmarkall @brandon-b-miller @vyasr Can we cross-link an issue describing the problem with Record types / UDFs? Anything to document why we’re pinning in a little more detail, so that we can resolve it later when 0.57 is out and have everything link together.

@gmarkall
Copy link
Contributor

@bdice Created in #13002 to record the general idea - I don't have a working cuDF environment right now so the issue doesn't have e.g. the traceback and a complete environment description attached, but the problem is well-understood.

Copy link
Contributor

@gmarkall gmarkall left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM (from the perspective of the Numba version ranges).

@vyasr
Copy link
Contributor Author

vyasr commented Mar 23, 2023

/merge

@rapids-bot rapids-bot bot merged commit 4ab227d into rapidsai:branch-23.04 Mar 23, 2023
@vyasr vyasr deleted the fix/pin_numba branch January 23, 2024 21:22
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
3 - Ready for Review Ready for review by team improvement Improvement / enhancement to an existing function non-breaking Non-breaking change Python Affects Python cuDF API.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants