-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18.4k
ENH: Implement masked algorithm for value_counts #54984
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
Conversation
Does this close any open issues? Maybe #44946? |
There is an issue that includes all of our algorithms (mode is missing), we can close after I finish with that |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
lgtm
merging this |
This patch may have induced a performance regression. If it was a necessary behavior change, this may have been expected and everything is okay. Please check the links below. If any ASVs are parameterized, the combinations of parameters that a regression has been detected for appear as subbullets.
Subsequent benchmarks may have skipped some commits. The link below lists the commits that are between the two benchmark runs where the regression was identified. |
I agree that the regression look valid based on ASV, but 2 things point in another direction:
It's just very weird, not sure what to do |
Ah, I didn't think to check if a dependency changed. Will check that. |
This is mostly going through our own cython code, but nothing that I’ve touched. It’s very weird |
doc/source/whatsnew/vX.X.X.rst
file if fixing a bug or adding a new feature.this adapts the same methods we are using for unique and friends. We get a 5-10% performance improvement as the Number of NAs grows