Updated writewithschema in tables.jl #20
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
addressed write Vector size issue (17): the first row was taken as the underlying multiplier of the buffer, causing failures should subsequent rows be larger (with at least one >5% larger than the first). adjusted the strategy to initially find the maximum row size, leveraging this as the buffer multiplier. a more sensible approach would be to sum the row sizes, to create an exact buffer vector, but I am unaware of potential downstream impacts
Update tables.jl
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
addressed write Vector size issue (17): the first row was taken as the underlying multiplier of the buffer, causing failures should subsequent rows be larger (with at least one >5% larger than the first).
adjusted the strategy to initially find the maximum row size, leveraging this as the buffer multiplier.
a more sensible approach would be to sum the row sizes, to create an exact buffer vector, but I am unaware of potential downstream impacts