cudf
cudf copied to clipboard
rapidsai
[BUG] OrcReader benchmark failure
Describe the bug ORC_READER_BENCH crashes with
terminate called after throwing an instance of 'cudf::logic_error'
what(): cuDF failure at: /home/karthikeyan/3cudf/cpp/benchmarks/io/orc/orc_reader.cpp:145: Benchmark did not read the entire table
Steps/Code to reproduce bug
./benchmarks/ORC_READER_BENCH --benchmark_filter=OrcRead/row_selection/0/4/1/3/0
or
Run all OrcRead/row_selection benchmarks.
time ./benchmarks/ORC_READER_BENCH --benchmark_filter=row_selection
Additional context Discovered while working on https://github.com/rapidsai/cudf/pull/10109
Looks like a duplicate of https://github.com/rapidsai/cudf/issues/9961
This issue has been labeled inactive-30d due to no recent activity in the past 30 days. Please close this issue if no further response or action is needed. Otherwise, please respond with a comment indicating any updates or changes to the original issue and/or confirm this issue still needs to be addressed. This issue will be labeled inactive-90d if there is no activity in the next 60 days.
![github-actions[bot] avatar](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/15368?v=4 "Published by a pub.dev verified publisher"){kind=small}
This issue has been labeled inactive-90d due to no recent activity in the past 90 days. Please close this issue if no further response or action is needed. Otherwise, please respond with a comment indicating any updates or changes to the original issue and/or confirm this issue still needs to be addressed.
Still relevant. The issue is not fixed. The benchmark arg is disabled in https://github.com/rapidsai/cudf/pull/10194 https://github.com/rapidsai/cudf/pull/9963#issuecomment-1004832863 https://github.com/rapidsai/cudf/blob/c01a2a41b7d57a1360324270101d9304fbc9515f/cpp/benchmarks/io/parquet/parquet_reader.cpp#L187-L188
This issue has been labeled inactive-90d due to no recent activity in the past 90 days. Please close this issue if no further response or action is needed. Otherwise, please respond with a comment indicating any updates or changes to the original issue and/or confirm this issue still needs to be addressed.
@karthikeyann Did I make a mistake here? It seems like we should probably re-open this.
I'll reopen for now so that we don't lose track. @karthikeyann feel free to close again if the closing was correct, but I agree that it seems unrelated to the linked issue.
Looking back, I think this was indeed closed for the wrong reasons, but it can be closed. This issue is no longer relevant after #11611 and #11543