pydata / pydata/xarray

Switch our lazy array classes to use Dask instead?

Open
#1,725 9 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

API design design question topic-lazy array
Dominant language
Python
Stars
4.2k
Forks
1.4k
Avg merge
2d 15h
Merged PRs (30d)
14

Description

Ported from #1724, comment by @shoyer

In the long term, it would be nice to get ride of these uses of _data, maybe by switching entirely from our lazy array classes to Dask.

The subtleties of checking _data vs data are undesirable, e.g., consider the bug on these lines:
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/blob/1a012080e0910f3295d0fc26806ae18885f56751/xarray/core/formatting.py#L212-L213

Contributor guide

Open the contributing guide

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

Research direction

Start with the review comment from pull request #1724 and inspect the _data versus data handling at xarray/core/formatting.py lines 212-213. Then map the existing lazy array classes and their _data uses before defining a Dask migration scope; done would mean the relevant lazy-array behavior no longer depends on those classes without reintroducing the cited bug.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Assessment

Tech stack
python
Domain
data
Issue type
Refactor
Difficulty
5/5
Estimated time
Over a week
Activity status
Stale
Clarity
Needs clarification
Newbie friendliness
25/100

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.