feat: support in-memory datasets #1743
Open
Conversation
This file contains 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
changhiskhan
force-pushed
the
changhiskhan/memory
branch
from
1538a81
to
32753d6
Compare
wjones127
requested changes
Dec 26, 2023
| @@ -467,28 +468,29 @@ impl Dataset { | |||
| /// Returns the newly created [`Dataset`]. | |||
| /// Or Returns [Error] if the dataset already exists. | |||
| /// | |||
| pub async fn write( | |||
| pub async fn write_to_uri( | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Did we have to rename this? It seems like it really blew up the scope of the PR and is still causing CI failures.
Comment on lines
+562
to
575
| pub async fn overwrite( | ||
| &mut self, | ||
| batches: impl RecordBatchReader + Send + 'static, | ||
| params: Option<WriteParams>, | ||
| ) -> Result<()> { | ||
| // Box it so we don't monomorphize for every one. We take the generic | ||
| // parameter for API ergonomics. | ||
| let batches = Box::new(batches); | ||
| let params = params.unwrap_or_else(|| WriteParams { | ||
| mode: WriteMode::Overwrite, | ||
| ..Default::default() | ||
| }); | ||
| self.write_impl(batches, params).await | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It seems like this does more than just overwrite if the user passes WriteParams with mode other than WriteMode::Overwrite, so perhaps this is not a great name? Could do something like write_into().
| self, | ||
| data_obj: ReaderLike, | ||
| schema: Optional[Schema] = None, | ||
| mode: str = "append", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can get much better auto-complete if you use Literal.
Suggested change
| mode: str = "append", | |
| mode: Literal["append", "overwrite"] = "append", |
Comment on lines
+97
to
+99
| def __init__(self, _ds: _Dataset): | ||
| self._uri = _ds.uri | ||
| self._ds = _ds |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is going to break so much existing code...
Could we instead just make a classmethod and keep the existing init method:
@classmethod
def _from_inner(cls, ds: _Dataset):
self = cls.__new__()
self._uri = _ds.uri
self._ds = _ds
return self
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
To support in-memory LanceDB tables, we want to be able to keep a reference to the same object store across various dataset operations. This required the following changes:
write_datatowrite_to_urito disambiguate from thewrite_datainstance methods