Skip to content

refactor(ci): move pyarrow from ci image to test scripts #21804

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

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
May 12, 2025

Conversation

stdrc
Copy link
Member

@stdrc stdrc commented May 9, 2025

I hereby agree to the terms of the RisingWave Labs, Inc. Contributor License Agreement.

What's changed and what's your intention?

Move pyarrow package installation from CI image building to test shell script, to avoid future incompatibility.

Checklist

  • I have written necessary rustdoc comments.
  • I have added necessary unit tests and integration tests.
  • I have added test labels as necessary.
  • I have added fuzzing tests or opened an issue to track them.
  • My PR contains breaking changes.
  • My PR changes performance-critical code, so I will run (micro) benchmarks and present the results.
  • I have checked the Release Timeline and Currently Supported Versions to determine which release branches I need to cherry-pick this PR into.

Documentation

  • My PR needs documentation updates.
Release note

Copy link
Member Author

stdrc commented May 9, 2025

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

@stdrc stdrc changed the title move pyarrow from ci image to test scripts refactor(ci): move pyarrow from ci image to test scripts May 9, 2025
@stdrc stdrc marked this pull request as ready for review May 9, 2025 09:06
@stdrc stdrc requested review from BugenZhao, wcy-fdu and Copilot May 9, 2025 09:06
Copy link
Contributor

@Copilot Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull Request Overview

This PR refactors the handling of the pyarrow dependency by moving its installation from the CI image build into the test scripts, ensuring future compatibility. Key changes include:

  • Bumping arrow_udf version in the UDF requirements file.
  • Adding a new S3 requirements file with pyarrow and related dependencies.
  • Updating CI test scripts and the Dockerfile to install dependencies via requirements files instead of inline.

Reviewed Changes

Copilot reviewed 6 out of 6 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.

Show a summary per file
File Description
e2e_test/udf/remote_python/requirements.txt Updated arrow_udf version to 0.3.1.
e2e_test/s3/requirements.txt Added dependencies (pyarrow, minio, psycopg2-binary, opendal, pandas) for S3 tests.
ci/scripts/slow-e2e-test.sh Changed dependency installation to use the UDF requirements file.
ci/scripts/s3-source-test.sh Changed dependency installation to use the S3 requirements file.
ci/Dockerfile Removed pyarrow installation to defer dependency management to test scripts.
ci/.env Updated the BUILD_ENV_VERSION to a more recent value.

Signed-off-by: Richard Chien <[email protected]>
@@ -58,6 +58,10 @@ steps:
- monorepo-diff#v1.2.0:
diff: "git diff --name-only origin/main"
watch:
- path: "ci/.env"
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Shall we merge the path?

https://github.com/adikari/monorepo-diff-buildkite-plugin#path

A list of paths can be provided to trigger the desired pipeline. Changes in any of the paths will initiate the pipeline provided in trigger.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Let's do it when there're 3 paths 😄

@stdrc stdrc added this pull request to the merge queue May 12, 2025
Merged via the queue into main with commit 0098ebe May 12, 2025
30 of 31 checks passed
@stdrc stdrc deleted the rc/fix-pyarrow-version branch May 12, 2025 09:13
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants