Skip to content

Conversation

@larsevj
Copy link
Collaborator

@larsevj larsevj commented Dec 8, 2025

Issue
Resolves #12218

  • PR title captures the intent of the changes, and is fitting for release notes.
  • Added appropriate release note label
  • Commit history is consistent and clean, in line with the contribution guidelines.
  • Make sure unit tests pass locally after every commit (git rebase -i main --exec 'just rapid-tests')

When applicable

  • When there are user facing changes: Updated documentation
  • New behavior or changes to existing untested code: Ensured that unit tests are added (See Ground Rules).
  • Large PR: Prepare changes in small commits for more convenient review
  • Bug fix: Add regression test for the bug
  • Bug fix: Add backport label to latest release (format: 'backport release-branch-name')

@larsevj
Copy link
Collaborator Author

larsevj commented Dec 9, 2025

Tests fail due to bug in polars, will need to wait for 1.26.1 release.

@larsevj
Copy link
Collaborator Author

larsevj commented Dec 11, 2025

Now it fails on the following issue:
pola-rs/polars#25732

Could maybe reevaluate if there are better ways of applying the transformations.

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Jan 13, 2026

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 90.64%. Comparing base (c528c39) to head (0a7c093).

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #12475      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   90.67%   90.64%   -0.04%     
==========================================
  Files         429      429              
  Lines       29803    29803              
==========================================
- Hits        27025    27015      -10     
- Misses       2778     2788      +10     
Flag Coverage Δ
cli-tests 37.61% <ø> (+0.04%) ⬆️
gui-tests 69.35% <ø> (-0.06%) ⬇️
performance-and-unit-tests 73.91% <ø> (-0.02%) ⬇️
test 38.07% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@codspeed-hq
Copy link

codspeed-hq bot commented Jan 13, 2026

Merging this PR will not alter performance

✅ 22 untouched benchmarks


Comparing larsevj:unpin_polars (0a7c093) with main (c528c39)

Open in CodSpeed

Copy link

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 unpins the polars library version constraint to allow upgrading from version 1.34.0 to 1.37.1, while excluding problematic versions 1.26.0 and 1.35.

Changes:

  • Updated polars version constraint from >=1.32.3, <1.35 to >=1.32.3, !=1.35, !=1.26.0 in pyproject.toml
  • Replaced deprecated return_dtype parameter in map_elements() calls with .cast() method calls (polars API change)
  • Added defensive check to filter empty arrays in RFT configuration list comprehension
  • Added column ordering normalization in DataFrame comparison utility function

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 5 out of 6 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.

Show a summary per file
File Description
uv.lock Updates polars and polars-runtime-32 from 1.34.0 to 1.37.1
pyproject.toml Relaxes polars version constraint to allow 1.37.1 while excluding problematic versions
tests/ert/ui_tests/cli/test_field_parameter.py Removes unused Float32 import, replaces return_dtype with .cast(), adds column ordering fix
src/ert/storage/local_ensemble.py Replaces return_dtype parameter with .cast() method
src/ert/gui/tools/manage_experiments/storage_info_widget.py Replaces return_dtype parameter with .cast() method
src/ert/config/rft_config.py Adds empty array check to prevent issues with polars concat

@xjules xjules added this to SCOUT Jan 16, 2026
@xjules xjules moved this to Ready for Review in SCOUT Jan 16, 2026
Copy link
Contributor

@frode-aarstad frode-aarstad left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🚀

@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from Ready for Review to Reviewed in SCOUT Jan 16, 2026
@frode-aarstad
Copy link
Contributor

Will this need to be back-ported or mentioned in the release notes @xjules ?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

Status: Reviewed

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Unpin polars

3 participants