Updates #3788
Updates #3788
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #3788 +/- ##
=======================================
+ Coverage 99.7% 99.7% +0.1%
=======================================
Files 343 343
Lines 35793 35797 +4
=======================================
+ Hits 35656 35660 +4
Misses 137 137
Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. |
| @@ -151,7 +151,9 @@ def _drop_time_index(self, X, y): | |||
| if self.should_drop_time_index and self.time_index in X.columns: | |||
| X_schema = X.ww.schema | |||
| y_schema = y.ww.schema | |||
| index_name = X.index.name | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Needed to preserve the index name of the index here. The resulting error I was seeing was complaining about the index of X being renamed to "date" when "date" was also a column, so the subsequent access of X[self.time_index] was coming up as ambiguous. All these KeyError(0)'s here are that manifestation of that error that is fixed by these two lines.
| @@ -121,7 +121,7 @@ def _add_training_data_to_X_Y(self, X, y, X_train, y_train): | |||
| time_index = self.pipeline_params["time_index"] | |||
| freq = pd.infer_freq(X_train[time_index]) | |||
| correct_range = pd.date_range( | |||
| start=X_train["date"].iloc[-1], | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this was just a bug that failed a single integration test.
|
|
||
| # TODO: Replace this with a better test that reproduces the issue with bike_sharing | ||
| # causing the name of the internal X to shift. | ||
| X_train_t = clf._drop_time_index(X_train, y_train) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can someone file an issue to get some better testing around this?
Small updates to fix some integration tests.