Skip to content

REGR: preserve freq in DTI/TDI outer join #32166

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 10 commits into from
Feb 26, 2020
Merged

REGR: preserve freq in DTI/TDI outer join #32166

merged 10 commits into from
Feb 26, 2020

Conversation

jbrockmendel
Copy link
Member

also just a nice cleanup, hoping to get this into ExtensionIndex before long

mroeschke
mroeschke reviewed Feb 22, 2020
View reviewed changes
pandas/tests/indexes/datetimes/test_setops.py Outdated
@@ -367,6 +367,19 @@ def test_join_nonunique(self):
rs = idx1.join(idx2, how="outer")
assert rs.is_monotonic

@pytest.mark.parametrize("tz", [None, "US/Pacific"])
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Could we use the tz_aware_fixture here?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

sure

@gfyoung gfyoung added Regression Functionality that used to work in a prior pandas version Datetime Datetime data dtype labels Feb 22, 2020
@jreback jreback added this to the 1.1 milestone Feb 22, 2020
@jreback
Copy link
Contributor

jreback commented Feb 22, 2020

i marked for 1.1, but is this a regression?

@jreback
Copy link
Contributor

jreback commented Feb 22, 2020

rebase as well

@jbrockmendel
Copy link
Member Author

i marked for 1.1, but is this a regression?

The behavior changed between 0.25.3 and 1.0, but it isnt obvious whether to call it a regression or not because it didnt obviously break anything. (see #32157)

@jreback
Copy link
Contributor

jreback commented Feb 22, 2020

i marked for 1.1, but is this a regression?

The behavior changed between 0.25.3 and 1.0, but it isnt obvious whether to call it a regression or not because it didnt obviously break anything. (see #32157)

ok it was marked originally as a regression
however i bet this will non trivial to backport (tests)

so up to u

@jbrockmendel jbrockmendel removed the Regression Functionality that used to work in a prior pandas version label Feb 22, 2020
@jbrockmendel
Copy link
Member Author

removed REGR tag

@jreback
Copy link
Contributor

jreback commented Feb 23, 2020

hmm i think this needs a whatsnew note (to document that this is changing), otherwise lgtm.

jreback
jreback requested changes Feb 26, 2020
View reviewed changes
doc/source/whatsnew/v1.1.0.rst Outdated
@@ -57,6 +57,7 @@ Other API changes
will now be ``min`` and ``max`` to match with numeric dtypes in :meth:`DataFrame.describe` (:issue:`30164`)
- :meth:`Groupby.groups` now returns an abbreviated representation when called on large dataframes (:issue:`1135`)
- ``loc`` lookups with an object-dtype :class:`Index` and an integer key will now raise ``KeyError`` instead of ``TypeError`` when key is missing (:issue:`31905`)
- Joining on :class:`DatetimeIndex` or :class:`TimedeltaIndex` will preserve ``freq`` in simple cases (:issue:`32166`)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

i guess need to backport, can you move to 1.02

@jreback jreback modified the milestones: 1.1, 1.0.2 Feb 26, 2020
@jreback jreback merged commit 27f0000 into pandas-dev:master Feb 26, 2020
@jreback
Copy link
Contributor

jreback commented Feb 26, 2020

thanks @jbrockmendel

@lumberbot-app
Copy link

lumberbot-app bot commented Feb 26, 2020

Owee, I'm MrMeeseeks, Look at me.

There seem to be a conflict, please backport manually. Here are approximate instructions:

  1. Checkout backport branch and update it.
$ git checkout 1.0.x
$ git pull
  1. Cherry pick the first parent branch of the this PR on top of the older branch:
$ git cherry-pick -m1 27f0000804072e8d65e6c7939ec09069e1b9790e
  1. You will likely have some merge/cherry-pick conflict here, fix them and commit:
$ git commit -am 'Backport PR #32166: REGR: preserve freq in DTI/TDI outer join'
  1. Push to a named branch :
git push YOURFORK 1.0.x:auto-backport-of-pr-32166-on-1.0.x
  1. Create a PR against branch 1.0.x, I would have named this PR:

"Backport PR #32166 on branch 1.0.x"

And apply the correct labels and milestones.

Congratulation you did some good work ! Hopefully your backport PR will be tested by the continuous integration and merged soon!

If these instruction are inaccurate, feel free to suggest an improvement.

@jreback
Copy link
Contributor

jreback commented Feb 26, 2020

@jbrockmendel as expected this needs a manual backport :-<

@jbrockmendel jbrockmendel deleted the wrap_joined_index branch February 26, 2020 15:47
jbrockmendel added a commit to jbrockmendel/pandas that referenced this pull request Feb 26, 2020
@jbrockmendel
REGR: preserve freq in DTI/TDI outer join (pandas-dev#32166)
6ae3670
@jbrockmendel jbrockmendel mentioned this pull request Feb 27, 2020
Merged
jreback pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 27, 2020
@jbrockmendel
REGR: preserve freq in DTI/TDI outer join (#32166) (#32269)
84018bd
roberthdevries pushed a commit to roberthdevries/pandas that referenced this pull request Mar 2, 2020
@jbrockmendel @roberthdevries
REGR: preserve freq in DTI/TDI outer join (pandas-dev#32166)
8504a88
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@mroeschke mroeschke mroeschke left review comments

@jreback jreback jreback approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
Datetime Datetime data dtype
Projects
None yet
Milestone
1.0.2
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

API: joining DatetimeIndexes not preserving freq
5 participants
@jbrockmendel @jreback @mroeschke @gfyoung @simonjayhawkins