PERF: faster categorical ops for equal or larger than scalar #29820
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
topper-123
changed the title
gfyoung
added
Categorical
gfyoung
reviewed
Nov 23, 2019
doc/source/whatsnew/v1.0.0.rst
Outdated
| - Performance improvement when comparing a :meth:`Categorical` with a scalar and the scalar is not found in the categories (:issue:`29750`) | ||
| - Performance improvement when comparing a :class:`Categorical` with a scalar and the scalar is not found in the categories (:issue:`29750`) | ||
| - Performance improvement when checking if values in a :class:`Categorical` are equal, equal or larger or larger than a given scalar. | ||
| The improvement is not present if checking if the :class:`Categorical` is less than or less than or equal than the scalar (:issue:`xxxxx`) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why don't we have an issue number here? Otherwise, we should use the PR number.
gfyoung
reviewed
Nov 23, 2019
| if opname not in {"eq", "__eq__", "ge", "__ge__", "gt", "__gt__"}: | ||
| # check for NaN needed if we are not equal or larger | ||
| mask = self._codes == -1 | ||
| ret[mask] = False |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we have a performance test for this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No, no ASV's for this ATM. I actually can't get ASV to run locally, maybe a Windows issue?
Anyway, I've added I've a ASV test set, but haven't been able to run it myself, unforfunately. Isn't there a web page, where we post ASVs?
jreback
requested changes
Nov 24, 2019
pandas/core/arrays/categorical.py
Outdated
| # check for NaN in self | ||
| mask = self._codes == -1 | ||
| ret[mask] = False | ||
| if opname not in {"eq", "__eq__", "ge", "__ge__", "gt", "__gt__"}: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this is very strange that you are checking for eq and eq it’s just eq
topper-123
commented
Nov 24, 2019
| def time_union(self): | ||
| union_categoricals([self.a, self.b]) | ||
|
|
||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just moved this down so the constructor checks are first, which seems logical.
jreback
approved these changes
Nov 25, 2019
|
thanks @topper-123 |
proost
pushed a commit
to proost/pandas
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 19, 2019
proost
pushed a commit
to proost/pandas
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 19, 2019
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.
np.nan is always encoded to -1 in a Categorical, so encoded smaller than all other possible values.
So, if we're checking if a Categorical is equal or larger than a scalar, it is not necessary to find locations of -1, as those will always be False already.
Performance