Add PDS-H benchmark results to cudf.pandas docs - #23980
Conversation
| # Benchmarks | ||
|
|
||
| ## Database-like ops benchmarks | ||
| ## PDS-H benchmarks |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure if there's something better to call this, since canonically PDS-H is referring to Polars' benchmarks. Our benchmarking scripts call these PDS-H still so kept that way for now.
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml Review profile: CHILL Plan: Enterprise Run ID: ⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (2)
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
Included review availability: Your plan provides up to 12 included reviews per hour; 11 remain after this review. 📝 SummarySummary by CodeRabbit
WalkthroughChangesPDS-H benchmark documentation
Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~5 minutes Merge Risk: ⚪ Minimal · up to This updates the cudf.pandas benchmark documentation to report PDS-H SF50 results and reproduction guidance. No concrete merge-blocking risk remains. Suggested reviewers: 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
Full details: Docstring CoverageExplanation No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff. Analyzed 0 functions across 0 files. (1 skipped: 1 unsupported.) ✨ Finishing Touches 💡 1🛠️ Fix failing CI checks 💡
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Comment |
Description
Updates cudf.pandas benchmarks in our docs to report PDS-H results rather than our outdated duckdb benchmarks.
Also allows us to drop reference to data.rapids.ai from this page of our docs.
Checklist