dataiter VS db-benchmark

Here's another alternative. I wrote Dataiter specifically as I too was frustrated with Pandas. In my experience if you design a new API from scratch (and don't try to reimplement the Pandas API as many projects have done!) and have some vision and consistent principles, it's well possible to get a good intuitive API as a result. Two relevant issues remain: You're limited by NumPy's datatypes and their problems, such as memory-hogging strings and a lack of a proper missing value (NA), and secondly, limited by the Python language, so compared to e.g. dplyr's non-standard evaluation, you'll need to use lambda functions, which are unfortunately clumsy and verbose.

https://github.com/otsaloma/dataiter

Here's a comparison of dplyr vs. Dataiter vs. Pandas, which should give quick overview of the similarieties and differences.

https://dataiter.readthedocs.io/en/latest/_static/comparison...

Agreed, dplyr is great.

I built my own data frame implementation on top of NumPy specifically trying to accomplish a better API, similar to dplyr. It's not exactly the same naming or operations, but should feel familiar and much simpler and consistent than Pandas. And no indexes or axes.

Having done this, a couple notes on what will unavoidably differ in Python

* It probably makes more sense in Python to use classes, so method chaining instead of function piping. I wish one could syntactically skip enclosing parantheses in Python though, method chains look a bit verbose.

* Python doesn't have R's "non-standard evaluation", so you end up needing lambda functions for arguments in method chains and group-wise aggregation etc. I'd be interested if someone has a better solution.

* NumPy (and Pandas) is still missing a proper missing value (NA). It's a big pain to try to work around that.

https://github.com/otsaloma/dataiter

Real-world performance is complicated since data science covers a lot of use cases.

If you're just reading a small CSV to do analysis on it, then there will be no human-perceptible difference between Polars and Pandas. If you're reading a larger CSV with 100k rows, there still won't be much of a perceptible difference.

Per this (old) benchmark, there are differences once you get into 500MB+ territory: https://h2oai.github.io/db-benchmark/

I do think it was important for duckdb to put out a new version of the results as the earlier version of that benchmark [1] went dormant with a very old version of duckdb with very bad performance, especially against polars.

[1] https://h2oai.github.io/db-benchmark/

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33270638 :

> Apache Ballista and Polars do Apache Arrow and SIMD.

> The Polars homepage links to the "Database-like ops benchmark" of {Polars, data.table, DataFrames.jl, ClickHouse, cuDF, spark, (py)datatable, dplyr, pandas, dask, Arrow, DuckDB, Modin,} but not yet PostgresML? https://h2oai.github.io/db-benchmark/ *

LLM -> Vector database: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vector_database

/? inurl:awesome site:github.com "vector database"

I agree with your conclusion but want to add that switching from Julia may not make sense either.

According to these benchmarks: https://h2oai.github.io/db-benchmark/, DF.jl is the fastest library for some things, data.table for others, polars for others. Which is fastest depends on the query and whether it takes advantage of the features/properties of each.

For what it's worth, data.table is my favourite to use and I believe it has the nicest ergonomics of the three I spoke about.

Same. Numba does wonders for me in most scenarios. Yesterday I've discovered pola-rs and looks like I will add it to the stack. It's API is similar to pandas. Have a look at the benchmarks of cuDF, spark, dask, pandas compared to it: Benchmarks

The syntax has similarities with dplyr in terms of the way you chain operations, and it’s around an order of magnitude faster than pandas and dplyr (there’s a nice benchmark here). It’s also more memory-efficient and can handle larger-than-memory datasets via streaming if needed.

If interested in benchmarks comparing different dataframe implementations, here is one:

https://h2oai.github.io/db-benchmark/

Bad examples. Both numpy and pandas are notoriously un-optimized packages, losing handily to pretty much all their competitors (R, Julia, kdb+, vaex, polars). See https://h2oai.github.io/db-benchmark/ for a partial comparison.