CI/TST: Make test_vector_resize more deterministic

[mroeschke]

• Tests added and passed if fixing a bug or adding a new feature
• All code checks passed.

I had to xfail(strict=True) this test once before which leads me to believe that the initial random data may be causing this test to be flaky.

https://dev.azure.com/pandas-dev/pandas/_build/results?buildId=76111&view=logs&jobId=b1891a80-bdb0-5193-5f59-ce68a0874df0&j=b1891a80-bdb0-5193-5f59-ce68a0874df0&t=0a58a9e9-0673-539c-5bde-d78a5a3b655e

=================================== FAILURES ===================================
_ TestHashTableUnsorted.test_vector_resize[False-Int32HashTable-Int32Vector-int32-False-10] _
[gw1] darwin -- Python 3.9.12 /usr/local/miniconda/envs/pandas-dev/bin/python

self = <pandas.tests.libs.test_hashtable.TestHashTableUnsorted object at 0x161a3d7c0>
writable = False
htable = <pandas._libs.hashtable.Int32HashTable object at 0x1764fee30>
uniques = <pandas._libs.hashtable.Int32Vector object at 0x176528e00>
dtype = 'int32', safely_resizes = False, nvals = 10

    @pytest.mark.parametrize("nvals", [0, 10])  # resizing to 0 is special case
    @pytest.mark.parametrize(
        "htable, uniques, dtype, safely_resizes",
        [
            (ht.PyObjectHashTable, ht.ObjectVector, "object", False),
            (ht.StringHashTable, ht.ObjectVector, "object", True),
            (ht.Float64HashTable, ht.Float64Vector, "float64", False),
            (ht.Int64HashTable, ht.Int64Vector, "int64", False),
            (ht.Int32HashTable, ht.Int32Vector, "int32", False),
            pytest.param(
                ht.UInt64HashTable,
                ht.UInt64Vector,
                "uint64",
                False,
                marks=pytest.mark.xfail(
                    reason="Sometimes doesn't raise.",
        else:
            with pytest.raises(ValueError, match="external reference.*"):
>               htable.get_labels(vals, uniques, 0, -1)
E               Failed: DID NOT RAISE <class 'ValueError'>

[simonjayhawkins]

moving to 1.4.3

no problem to merge to main as autobackport is disabled for 1.4.3

[lumberbot-app]

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 1.4.x
git pull

2. Cherry pick the first parent branch of the this PR on top of the older branch:

git cherry-pick -x -m1 bea02f300bdf54d86aded7d5c4461dc340ddb929

3. You will likely have some merge/cherry-pick conflict here, fix them and commit:

git commit -am 'Backport PR #46602: CI/TST: Make test_vector_resize more deterministic'

4. Push to a named branch:

git push YOURFORK 1.4.x:auto-backport-of-pr-46602-on-1.4.x

5. Create a PR against branch 1.4.x, I would have named this PR:

"Backport PR #46602 on branch 1.4.x (CI/TST: Make test_vector_resize more deterministic)"

And apply the correct labels and milestones.

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

Remember to remove the Still Needs Manual Backport label once the PR gets merged.

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

[jreback]

@meeseeksdev backport 1.4.x

[lumberbot-app]

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 1.4.x
git pull

2. Cherry pick the first parent branch of the this PR on top of the older branch:

git cherry-pick -x -m1 bea02f300bdf54d86aded7d5c4461dc340ddb929

3. You will likely have some merge/cherry-pick conflict here, fix them and commit:

git commit -am 'Backport PR #46602: CI/TST: Make test_vector_resize more deterministic'

4. Push to a named branch:

git push YOURFORK 1.4.x:auto-backport-of-pr-46602-on-1.4.x

5. Create a PR against branch 1.4.x, I would have named this PR:

"Backport PR #46602 on branch 1.4.x (CI/TST: Make test_vector_resize more deterministic)"

And apply the correct labels and milestones.

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

Remember to remove the Still Needs Manual Backport label once the PR gets merged.

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

[simonjayhawkins]

#46350 was not backported (which this PR fixes), neither was the refactor #46106 that prevented the autobackport from succeeding and made some code changes to pandas/_libs/hashtable_class_helper.pxi.in that we probably don't want to backport (and maybe the reason #46350 was needed?)

change the milestone on this to 1.5 and close the backport PR #46625?

[mroeschke]

Sounds good to me. This doesn't fail often so hopefully it shouldn't affect the 1.4.x branch too often.

[simonjayhawkins]

This doesn't fail often so hopefully it shouldn't affect the 1.4.x branch too often.

will keep an eye out but I was thinking that it was maybe #46106 is the cause of the issue which would not affect 1.4.x anyway.