Skip to content

BUG: Google BigQuery API Change #5255

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

Closed
jacobschaer opened this issue Oct 17, 2013 · 4 comments · Fixed by #5262
Closed

BUG: Google BigQuery API Change #5255

jacobschaer opened this issue Oct 17, 2013 · 4 comments · Fixed by #5262
Milestone

Comments

@jacobschaer
Copy link
Contributor

This is a placeholder for a commit I'm working on to resolve a recently introduced API bug with pandas.io.gbq. Basically, the module fails to handle result pagination properly, so result sets are limied to 10k rows. When #4140 was pulled, we were told by Google that this would be a backend fix that would not require changes on our parts. Unfortunately, there were some issues with bq.py (v 2.0.15) which we listed as a requirement for this package, so we will be needing to up that to v2.0.16 and fix some compatibility bugs around new code introduced. To reiterate, the only mandatory change at this point is upping the bq.py requirement easy_install --upgrade bigquery, though the 10k result set bug is crippling in our opinion so we're making it a high priority to fix.

See: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/19145587/bq-py-not-paging-results/19260506?noredirect=1#comment28771950_19260506

@jtratner
Copy link
Contributor

Okay - glad you caught this - if you can fix it by early next week that
would be really helpful b/c it would be nice to have it fixed in the
release candidate for 0.13

@jacobschaer
Copy link
Contributor Author

I have a (slightly hacked together) patch that makes all my tests pass again... we'll try to clean it up and do some field testing today and hopefully I'll have a pull request this evening. All that changed was a few comments and the method which iterates over the result pages - so there shouldn't be much work needed to get it accepted.

@jtratner
Copy link
Contributor

Great - you don't need to add a note to release.rst for this, because
you're changing something that hasn't actually made it into a release :)
I'll try to review quickly so there won't be merge conflicts (but given
that it's in a separate file shouldn't be too big of a deal).

@jreback
Copy link
Contributor

jreback commented Oct 21, 2013

closed by #5262

@jreback jreback closed this as completed Oct 21, 2013
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 a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants