←back to thread

183 points jonbaer | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.208s | source
Show context
lvl155 ◴[] No.45125676[source]
Polars is certainly better than pandas doing things locally. But that is a low bar. I’ve not had great experience using Polars on large enough datasets. I almost always end up using duckdb. If I am using SQL at the end of the day, why bother starting with Polars? With AI these days, it’s ridiculously fast to put together performant SQLs. Heck you can even make your own grammar and be done with it.
replies(3): >>45126319 #>>45126571 #>>45126595 #
1. infecto ◴[] No.45126595[source]
I guess if it’s too large to be performant than SQL can be the way to go. I avoid sql for one off tasks though as I can more easily grok transformations in polars code than sql queries.