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

migrate to nanobind #44

Closed
wants to merge 9 commits into from
Closed

migrate to nanobind #44

wants to merge 9 commits into from

Conversation

jmoralez
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

Copy link

codspeed-hq bot commented Jul 24, 2024

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #44 will degrade performances by 37.94%

Comparing nanobind (290b913) with main (733b51c)

Summary

⚡ 1 improvements
❌ 12 regressions
✅ 7 untouched benchmarks

⚠️ Please fix the performance issues or acknowledge them on CodSpeed.

Benchmarks breakdown

Benchmark main nanobind Change
test_ewm 139.8 µs 74.6 µs +87.37%
test_lag_transforms[expanding_max] 31.8 ms 51.2 ms -37.94%
test_lag_transforms[expanding_min] 33.3 ms 52.1 ms -36.13%
test_lag_transforms[expanding_std] 24.3 ms 33.9 ms -28.31%
test_lag_transforms[rolling_max] 28.9 ms 46.1 ms -37.3%
test_lag_transforms[rolling_min] 30 ms 46.8 ms -35.83%
test_lag_transforms[rolling_quantile] 991.5 ms 1,130.2 ms -12.27%
test_lag_transforms[rolling_std] 23.4 ms 34.7 ms -32.49%
test_lag_transforms[seasonal_rolling_max] 43.8 ms 56.2 ms -22.09%
test_lag_transforms[seasonal_rolling_min] 44.9 ms 56.9 ms -21.1%
test_lag_transforms[seasonal_rolling_quantile] 999.7 ms 1,137 ms -12.07%
test_lag_transforms[seasonal_rolling_std] 32.1 ms 44 ms -27.14%
test_scalers[standard] 9.7 ms 12 ms -18.79%

@jmoralez jmoralez closed this Aug 22, 2024
@jmoralez jmoralez deleted the nanobind branch August 22, 2024 07:01
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.

1 participant