fix: disambiguate google-cloud-bigquery to_dataframe usage from pandas-gbq in ua. - #18369
Merged
Merged
Conversation
…ndas-gbq` in ua.
![gemini-code-assist[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/956858?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request updates the BigQuery client to include the google-cloud-bigquery version as a legacy identifier in the user agent string for to_dataframe and to_arrow operations, and adds corresponding unit tests. The review feedback suggests aliasing the imported version module to bq_version to avoid potential shadowing conflicts, and removing redundant local imports of the sys module within several test functions in test_table.py.
shuoweil
approved these changes
Sep 16, 2026
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
For internal issue b/540939659 and a follow-up to #18364
🦕