GH-46652: [Python][Docs] Update language for row_group_size parameter #46653
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
|
|
|
|
I think the two current CI failures are unrelated. |
|
|
AlenkaF
approved these changes
Jun 2, 2025
pitrou
approved these changes
Jun 4, 2025
|
After merging your PR, Conbench analyzed the 4 benchmarking runs that have been run so far on merge-commit 832bfa1. There were 72 benchmark results with an error:
There were no benchmark performance regressions. 🎉 The full Conbench report has more details. It also includes information about 42 possible false positives for unstable benchmarks that are known to sometimes produce them. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Rationale for this change
The docstrings for row_group_size could be clearer both in terms of (1) whether the value is rows instead of byte size and (2) use of unit prefixes. See #46652.
My idea here was that just saying "64 * 1024 * 1024" is probably more easily understood than using Mi (mebi). The existing text may be just fine so I'm happy to close this if others like how it reads now.
What changes are included in this PR?
, default Noneto docstring for top-levelwrite_tableAre these changes tested?
No.
Are there any user-facing changes?
No.