Skip to content
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

ARROW-6683: [Python] Test for fastparquet <-> pyarrow cross-compatibility #5498

Conversation

jorisvandenbossche
Copy link
Member

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-6683

@wesm is this more or less what you were thinking?

@kszucs
Copy link
Member

kszucs commented Sep 25, 2019

@ursabot build

@kszucs
Copy link
Member

kszucs commented Sep 25, 2019

The fast parquet test should run in the Buildbot conda builders now.

@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Sep 25, 2019

Codecov Report

❗ No coverage uploaded for pull request base (master@7f2d637). Click here to learn what that means.
The diff coverage is 18.75%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##             master    #5498   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage          ?   66.34%           
=========================================
  Files             ?      508           
  Lines             ?    70145           
  Branches          ?        0           
=========================================
  Hits              ?    46537           
  Misses            ?    23608           
  Partials          ?        0
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
python/pyarrow/tests/test_parquet.py 95.44% <18.75%> (ø)

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 7f2d637...4c1e3aa. Read the comment docs.

@jorisvandenbossche
Copy link
Member Author

The fast parquet test should run in the Buildbot conda builders now.

Indeed:

...
pyarrow/tests/test_parquet.py::test_fastparquet_cross_compatibility PASSED [ 80%]
...

Copy link
Member

@kszucs kszucs left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants