issue_comments
12 rows where issue = 229807027 sorted by updated_at descending
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
Suggested facets: created_at (date), updated_at (date)
issue 1
- Speed up `decode_cf_datetime` · 12 ✖
id | html_url | issue_url | node_id | user | created_at | updated_at ▲ | author_association | body | reactions | performed_via_github_app | issue |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
317814176 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/1414#issuecomment-317814176 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/1414 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDMxNzgxNDE3Ng== | jhamman 2443309 | 2017-07-25T17:42:58Z | 2017-07-25T17:43:19Z | MEMBER | Thanks @cchwala! I think the Pandas issue is sufficient on this one. |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Speed up `decode_cf_datetime` 229807027 | |
317786250 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/1414#issuecomment-317786250 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/1414 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDMxNzc4NjI1MA== | cchwala 102827 | 2017-07-25T16:03:46Z | 2017-07-25T16:03:46Z | CONTRIBUTOR | @jhamman @shoyer This should be ready to merge. Should I open an xarray issue concerning the bug with |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Speed up `decode_cf_datetime` 229807027 | |
317055124 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/1414#issuecomment-317055124 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/1414 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDMxNzA1NTEyNA== | jhamman 2443309 | 2017-07-21T16:56:52Z | 2017-07-21T16:56:52Z | MEMBER | Agreed. Let's leave the overflow fix for later. I'll give this one more review and we'll try to get this merged. |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Speed up `decode_cf_datetime` 229807027 | |
317036076 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/1414#issuecomment-317036076 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/1414 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDMxNzAzNjA3Ng== | shoyer 1217238 | 2017-07-21T15:44:15Z | 2017-07-21T15:44:15Z | MEMBER |
This still sounds like an improvement to me! |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Speed up `decode_cf_datetime` 229807027 | |
316963228 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/1414#issuecomment-316963228 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/1414 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDMxNjk2MzIyOA== | cchwala 102827 | 2017-07-21T10:10:54Z | 2017-07-21T10:10:54Z | CONTRIBUTOR | hmm... it's still complicated. To avoid the
Since I do not think this will be fixed soon (I would gladly look at it, but have no time and probably not enough knowledge about the Do you want to merge this PR, knowing that there still is the overflow issue that was in the code before? Or should I continue to try to fix the current overflow bug in this PR? |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Speed up `decode_cf_datetime` 229807027 | |
315859360 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/1414#issuecomment-315859360 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/1414 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDMxNTg1OTM2MA== | jhamman 2443309 | 2017-07-17T19:38:03Z | 2017-07-17T19:38:03Z | MEMBER | @cchwala - thanks for keeping this moving. Once you've taking another pass at the code and added a Whatsnew note, I'll give it a final review. |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Speed up `decode_cf_datetime` 229807027 | |
315643209 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/1414#issuecomment-315643209 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/1414 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDMxNTY0MzIwOQ== | cchwala 102827 | 2017-07-16T22:41:50Z | 2017-07-16T22:41:50Z | CONTRIBUTOR | ...but wait. The Hence, I should still add a check for |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Speed up `decode_cf_datetime` 229807027 | |
315637844 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/1414#issuecomment-315637844 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/1414 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDMxNTYzNzg0NA== | cchwala 102827 | 2017-07-16T21:15:04Z | 2017-07-16T21:34:12Z | CONTRIBUTOR | @jhamman - I found some differences between the old code in master an my code when decoding values close to the np.datetime64 overflow. My code produces First, I wanted to test and fix that. However, I may have found that the old implementation did not behave correctly when crossing the "overflow" line just slightly. I have summed that up in a notebook here. My conclusion would be, that the code in this PR here is not only faster, but also more correct than the old one. However, since it is quite late in the evening and my head needs some rest, I would like to get a second (or third) opinion... |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Speed up `decode_cf_datetime` 229807027 | |
315322859 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/1414#issuecomment-315322859 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/1414 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDMxNTMyMjg1OQ== | cchwala 102827 | 2017-07-14T10:05:04Z | 2017-07-14T10:05:04Z | CONTRIBUTOR | @jhamman - Sorry. I was away from office (and everything related to work) for more than a month and had to catchup with a lot of things. I will sum up my stuff and post here, hopefully after todays lunch break. |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Speed up `decode_cf_datetime` 229807027 | |
315206339 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/1414#issuecomment-315206339 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/1414 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDMxNTIwNjMzOQ== | jhamman 2443309 | 2017-07-13T21:24:02Z | 2017-07-13T21:24:02Z | MEMBER | @cchwala - Any update on the testing / overflow issue you mentioned? |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Speed up `decode_cf_datetime` 229807027 | |
305469383 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/1414#issuecomment-305469383 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/1414 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDMwNTQ2OTM4Mw== | cchwala 102827 | 2017-06-01T11:43:27Z | 2017-06-01T11:43:27Z | CONTRIBUTOR | Just a short notice. Sorry, for the delay. I am still working on this PR, but I am too busy right now to finish the overflow testing. I think I found some edge cases which have to be handled. I will provide more details soon. |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Speed up `decode_cf_datetime` 229807027 | |
302943727 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/1414#issuecomment-302943727 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/1414 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDMwMjk0MzcyNw== | cchwala 102827 | 2017-05-21T15:28:15Z | 2017-05-21T15:28:15Z | CONTRIBUTOR | Thanks @shoyer and @jhamman for the feedback. I will change things accordingly. Concerning tests, I will think again about additional checking for correct handling of overflow. I must admit, that I am not 100% sure that every case is handled correctly by the current code and checked by the current tests. Will have to think about it a little when I find time within the next days... |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Speed up `decode_cf_datetime` 229807027 |
Advanced export
JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited, object
CREATE TABLE [issue_comments] ( [html_url] TEXT, [issue_url] TEXT, [id] INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, [node_id] TEXT, [user] INTEGER REFERENCES [users]([id]), [created_at] TEXT, [updated_at] TEXT, [author_association] TEXT, [body] TEXT, [reactions] TEXT, [performed_via_github_app] TEXT, [issue] INTEGER REFERENCES [issues]([id]) ); CREATE INDEX [idx_issue_comments_issue] ON [issue_comments] ([issue]); CREATE INDEX [idx_issue_comments_user] ON [issue_comments] ([user]);
user 3