-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 19.2k
ENH: Allow third-party packages to register IO engines #61642
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
Merged
Merged
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
12 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
f33778c
New third-party IO engines
datapythonista 555459b
Add tests and fix bugs
datapythonista 1ca77c1
Finishing docs and tests
datapythonista d388101
typo in doc label and typing issues
datapythonista e333510
Merge branch 'main' into io_engines
datapythonista cb82ffb
Fix link in markdown
datapythonista 088e5de
Merge branch 'io_engines' of github.com:datapythonista/pandas into io…
datapythonista 9e71a9d
Merge main
datapythonista ebfc20c
Fix link
datapythonista a4b6cdc
Update doc/source/development/extending.rst
datapythonista 0b3b00c
Update doc/source/development/extending.rst
datapythonista 776e04c
Update pandas/core/frame.py
datapythonista File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
Next
Next commit
New third-party IO engines
- Loading branch information
commit f33778c9030dda546584d1f7c287a5d91383ca38
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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.
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.
Should the
read_*andto_*signatures also have anengine_kwargs: dict[str, Any] | Noneargument to allow specific engine arguments to be passes per implementation?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.
Very good point. In
read_parquetwe already have a**kwargsfor engine specific arguments. Inmap,apply... it's a normalengine_kwargssince**kwargsis used in some cases for the udf keyword arguments. I think for IO readers/writers**kwargsasread_parquetdoes is fine.I didn't want to add the engine to all connectors in this PR to keep it simpler, but I'm planning to follow up with another PR that adds it, and adds
**kwargsfor connectors where it's not there already. Surely happy to add both things here if you prefer, just thought it would make reviewing simpler to keep the implementation separate from all the changes to parameters.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.
if engine-specific kwargs are needed, isn't that a good reason to use
engine.read_whatever(path, **kwargs)instead of pd.read_[...]?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.
This is a good point. Thinking about readers we don't care about I think what you propose is the best choice. And this PR doesn't really prevent that from happening anyway. But for readers we cared enough to include in pandas, I think this new interface offers an advantage. For example, there was some discussion on whether we should move the fastparquet engine out of pandas, Patrick suggested it. I think this interface allows moving the fastparquet engine to the fastparquet package, users with fastparquet installed will still have it available in the same way as it is now, but we can forget about it.
Of course discussions about moving readers out of pandas will have to happen later. But this interface seems quite useful and it's very simple, so in my opinion it's a good deal.