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

BigQuery: deprecate pandas code paths that do not use pyarrow #3

Closed
plamut opened this issue Jan 23, 2020 · 0 comments · Fixed by #48
Closed

BigQuery: deprecate pandas code paths that do not use pyarrow #3

plamut opened this issue Jan 23, 2020 · 0 comments · Fixed by #48
Assignees
Labels
api: bigquery Issues related to the googleapis/python-bigquery API. type: process A process-related concern. May include testing, release, or the like.

Comments

@plamut
Copy link
Contributor

plamut commented Jan 23, 2020

In the pandas-related BigQuery code, there is a lot of branching on whether pyarrow is available or not, and significant portions of business logic dealing with both cases.

The pyarrow side is often more efficient, more concise, and less prone to weird edge cases, thus it is preferred that it eventually becomes the only code path.

The goal of this issue is to emit deprecation warnings whenever a code path is hit that deals with pandas, but without the pyarrow dependency available.

@plamut plamut transferred this issue from googleapis/google-cloud-python Feb 4, 2020
@product-auto-label product-auto-label bot added the api: bigquery Issues related to the googleapis/python-bigquery API. label Feb 4, 2020
@plamut plamut added the type: process A process-related concern. May include testing, release, or the like. label Feb 4, 2020
@plamut plamut self-assigned this Feb 26, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
api: bigquery Issues related to the googleapis/python-bigquery API. type: process A process-related concern. May include testing, release, or the like.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant