conda-forge / arrow-cpp-feedstock

A conda-smithy repository for arrow-cpp.
BSD 3-Clause "New" or "Revised" License
10 stars 62 forks source link

ENH: Remove `track_features` for cuda builds #1425

Closed h-vetinari closed 1 week ago

h-vetinari commented 5 months ago

libarrow & pyarrow have had a track_features weighing down the CUDA builds ever since those got introduced in https://github.com/conda-forge/arrow-cpp-feedstock/commit/1e57bc08f594170075e20c99db44f081e0518f63 & https://github.com/conda-forge/arrow-cpp-feedstock/commit/99a1e8df43adaa1f4671ea7c77e56f2c3ce17171

I don't see why we need to do that - people with the right drivers installed (and thus the right __cuda virtual package) should just get the CUDA builds? We do have run-dependence on __cuda already https://github.com/conda-forge/arrow-cpp-feedstock/blob/909b79ce4a04dcc031fe93c534ef03ad3f2e7dfc/recipe/meta.yaml#L208 so clients without CUDA support wouldn't pointlessly download the bigger binaries.

Am I missing something else?

CC @conda-forge/arrow-cpp @conda-forge/core

kkraus14 commented 5 months ago

I don't know of anyone really using the libarrow / pyarrow cuda modules. The one project that I know that was previously using it was cuDF, but it has since moved to not needing the cuda modules.

I would argue we should keep the track_features in place until someone presents a compelling reason otherwise.

jakirkham commented 5 months ago

If no one needs them, does it make sense to deprecate them?

xhochy commented 5 months ago

We only weighed them down initially because there was no __cuda dependency initially.

h-vetinari commented 3 weeks ago

We only weighed them down initially because there was no __cuda dependency initially.

That was my understanding of the history behind this as well. I'm planning to try to remove this for v18 and we can see how things go.

h-vetinari commented 3 weeks ago

Also just found that I had opened an issue for this even longer ago already (#1169) where there was another voice in favour of doing this.