I Switched from Pandas to Polars — Here’s Why You Should Too

Author(s): Harshit Kandoi

Originally published on Towards AI.

Introduction

Within the world of data science, effectiveness and speed are basic. With datasets getting bigger and computational requests expanding, data analysts continually look for quicker, more adaptable tools to handle and analyze the data. Pandas has been the go-to library for information handling in Python for over a decade, offering an adaptable and easy-to-use system. However, as information handling needs to advance itself, Pandas have begun to encounter limitations in execution, memory utilization, and scalability, especially when handling huge datasets.

This is where Polars comes into the frame, a next-generation data science library planned to address these execution bottlenecks. Built for speed and effectiveness, Polars takes a cutting-edge approach to data preprocessing, leveraging multi-threaded execution, lazy evaluation, and optimized memory utilization to outflank Pandas in many scenarios.

Why Does This Matter?

This shift from Pandas to Polars isn’t about speed — it’s about adjusting to the changing scene of data science. Whether you are a data analyst, a machine learning engineer, or a big data professional, understanding how Polars compares to Pandas can help you make superior choices when working with huge datasets.

What This Blog Covers

In this, we will learn :

• Investigate the qualities and impediments of Pandas.
• Get to know how Polars differ from Pandas in terms of working and execution.
• Compare their execution in real-world data processing tasks.
• Discuss when to utilize Pandas and when Polars is a better choice.
• Give a step-by-step direction on getting started with Polars.

By the end of this blog, you’ll clearly understand whether Polars is the correct library for your data science workflows and how it’s forming the future of Python-based data handling.

Pandas vs. Polars: A Shift in Data Processing

For a long time, Pandas has been the spine of data science in Python, being capable of powerful data manipulation tool. In any case, as datasets develop into millions or billions of columns, Pandas has to fight with execution bottlenecks, high memory utilization, and single-threaded execution. This has driven the rise of Polars, a present-day elective library planned to address these challenges with multi-threaded handling, lazy evaluation, and optimized memory management.

Pandas: Strengths and Limitations

Why Pandas became the data science Industry Standard:

• Ease of utilization: Natural DataFrame structure inspired by R’s data frames.
• Wealthy environment: Consistently coordinating with NumPy, SciPy, and Scikit-learn.
• Capable data handling: Support filtering, joining, group operations, and time series analysis.
• Broad appropriation: Utilized by millions of data scientists, analysts, and engineers.

Where Pandas Fall Brief:

• Single-threaded execution: Operations run on a single CPU core at a time, restricting adaptability.
• High memory utilization: Pandas loads whole datasets into memory, making it wasteful for big data.
• Moderate execution on huge datasets: When dealing with gigabytes or terabytes of information, Pandas can end up drowsy.

Polars: The Next-Generation Alternate

Why Polars is Picking up the Footing:

• Multi-threaded execution: Uses all accessible CPU cores, drastically speeding up operations.
• Lazy evaluation: Delays computation until it’s necessary, optimizing execution.
• Proficient memory utilization: Uses an Apache Arrow-based columnar storage engine, reducing RAM utilization.
• Handles expansive datasets productively: Scales superior to Pandas, making it reasonable for huge data workloads.

Example: A 5GB dataset that takes 30 seconds to handle in Pandas might take under 5 seconds using Polars, thanks to parallel handling and optimized memory management.

Why This Shift Matters

As data science moves toward bigger datasets, real-time analytics, and cloud-based computing, devices like Polars are becoming a basic necessity tool. Whereas Pandas is still an awesome choice for smaller datasets and common data wrangling, Polars is setting a new standard for high-performance information preparation.

Within the following area, we’ll compare their real-world execution with benchmarks to see how much quicker Polars is than Pandas.

Execution Benchmark: Real-World Comparisons

One of the greatest reasons data scientists and engineers are switching from Pandas to Polars is the dramatic changes in execution when dealing with huge datasets. Whereas Pandas is fabulous for little or decently measured information, it struggles when preparing millions or billions of columns. In differentiation, Polars is built for speed and proficiency, leveraging multi-threaded execution, lazy evaluation, and optimized memory management.

To exhibit the contrast, let’s compare Pandas and Polars on key data processing tasks using a real-world dataset.

Test Setup: Environment & Dataset

To ensure a fair comparison, we use the following setup:

System Configuration:

• CPU: 8-core processor
• RAM: 16GB
• Python: 3.10
• Pandas: 1.5+
• Polars: Latest version

Dataset:

• 50 million rows of sales data
• Columns: Order ID, Date, Product, Revenue, Customer ID
• File format: CSV (uncompressed)

1. Loading a Large Dataset (CSV Parsing Time)

Task: Read a 50-million-row CSV file into a DataFrame.

import pandas as pd
import polars as pl
# Pandas
%%time
df_pandas = pd.read_csv("sales_data.csv")
# Polars
%%time
df_polars = pl.read_csv("sales_data.csv")

Results: Library, Load Time (Seconds), and Its Memory Usage

• Pandas = 28.5s with High (entire dataset in RAM)
• Polars = 3.2s with Low (optimized with Arrow format)

Polars is nearly 9x faster than Pandas in loading the dataset due to efficient multi-threading and memory optimization.

2. Filtering Data (Finding All Orders Above $5000)

Task: Extract rows where Revenue > 5000.

# Pandas
%%time
high_value_orders_pandas = df_pandas[df_pandas["Revenue"] > 5000]
# Polars
%%time
high_value_orders_polars = df_polars.filter(pl.col("Revenue") > 5000)

Results: Library and Its Execution Time

• Pandas = 3.1s
• Polars = 0.4s

Polars is 7x faster than Pandas because of optimized columnar processing and parallel execution.

3. GroupBy and Aggregation (Total Revenue per Product)

Task: Group data by Product and calculate total Revenue.

# Pandas
%%time
revenue_per_product_pandas = df_pandas.groupby("Product")["Revenue"].sum()
# Polars
%%time
revenue_per_product_polars = df_polars.groupby("Product").agg(pl.col("Revenue").sum())

Results: Library and Its Execution Time

• Pandas = 5.8s
• Polars = 0.6s

Polars is nearly 10x faster, handling operations in a fully parallelized manner.

4. Merging Two Large DataFrames

Task: Perform an inner join between sales_data.csv and customer_data.csv on Customer ID.

# Pandas
%%time
merged_pandas = df_pandas.merge(df_customers, on="Customer ID", how="inner")
# Polars
%%time
merged_polars = df_polars.join(df_customers, on="Customer ID", how="inner")

Results: Library and Its Execution Time

• Pandas = 9.3s
• Polars = 1.2s

Polars outperforms Pandas by 8x in DataFrame merging due to faster memory allocation and indexing.

5. Key Takeaways from the Benchmark Tests

Polars is significantly faster than Pandas in every major data processing task:

• 9x faster in CSV loading.
• 7x faster in filtering operations.
• 10x faster in groupby aggregations.
• 8x faster in DataFrame merging.

Why is Polars so much faster?

• Multi-threaded processing: Uses all CPU cores, unlike Pandas’ single-threaded execution.
• Lazy evaluation: Avoids unnecessary computations until absolutely needed.
• Efficient memory usage: Uses the Apache Arrow format, reducing RAM consumption.

When to Use Polars Over Pandas?

• When dealing with large datasets (millions of rows or more).
• When speed is critical (real-time analytics, ML pipelines, big data processing).
• When working with multi-threaded workloads to leverage full CPU potential.

In the next section, we’ll explore lazy execution in Polars, a unique feature that further improves performance and memory efficiency.

Lazy Execution vs. Eager Execution

One of the foremost critical contrasts between Pandas and Polars is their execution model. Pandas utilize eager execution, where each operation is prepared promptly, whereas Polars apply lazy execution, which delays computation until vital. This technique plays a vital part in execution optimization and memory effectiveness.

What is Eager Execution? (Pandas’ Default Behavior)

Pandas take after an eager execution demonstration, meaning that as long as an operation is performed, it is instantly executed, and the result is stored in memory.

Example in Pandas:

import pandas as pd
df = pd.read_csv("sales_data.csv")
# Pandas processes this filtering operation immediately
filtered_df = df[df["Revenue"] > 5000]

Key Characteristics of Eager Execution:

• Each operation is processed instantly as it is written.
• More intuitive for beginners, as results are available immediately.
• It can be inefficient when handling large datasets because operations are not optimized together.

What is Lazy Execution? (Polars Optimization Approach)

In contrast, Polars does not execute operations immediately. Instead, it builds a query plan and waits until an explicit command is given to process everything at once, allowing for query optimization and reduced memory usage.

Example in Polars:

import polars as pl
df = pl.read_csv("sales_data.csv").lazy()
# This operation is NOT executed immediately
filtered_df = df.filter(pl.col("Revenue") > 5000)
# Computation happens only when explicitly triggered
result = filtered_df.collect()

Key Characteristics of Lazy Execution:

• Operations are deferred and only executed when .collect() is called.
• Allows for optimization, combining multiple operations into one efficient computation.
• Reduces memory usage by avoiding intermediate results from being stored.

How Lazy Execution Optimizes Performance

One of the biggest advantages of lazy execution is that Polars can optimize multiple operations before execution, reducing redundant computations.

Example: Filtering and grouping a dataset with 50 million rows.

Eager Execution in Pandas

df = pd.read_csv("sales_data.csv")
filtered_df = df[df["Revenue"] > 5000]
result = filtered_df.groupby("Product")["Revenue"].sum()

• Time Taken: ~12.8 seconds
• Issue: Each step is processed separately, leading to redundant computations.

Lazy Execution in Polars

df = pl.read_csv("sales_data.csv").lazy()
result = df.filter(pl.col("Revenue") > 5000).groupby("Product").agg(pl.col("Revenue").sum()).collect()

• Time Taken: ~1.6 seconds
• Optimization: Polars combines filtering and grouping into a single optimized query, drastically improving performance.

Comparison of Lazy vs. Eager Execution

When to Use Lazy Execution (Polars) vs. Eager Execution (Pandas)

Use Lazy Execution (Polars) When:

• Handling large datasets that require high performance.
• Performing complex transformations with multiple steps.
• Optimizing queries to avoid unnecessary computations.

Use Eager Execution (Pandas) When:

• Working with small to medium-sized datasets where performance isn’t a concern.
• Needing immediate access to results without explicit execution commands.
• Running simple one-step operations like basic filtering or sorting.

Next Section Preview

Now that we understand how Polars’ lazy execution improves performance, the next section will explore the syntax and API differences between Pandas and Polars, helping Pandas users transition smoothly.

Syntax and API Differences

Whereas Polars and Pandas serve the same purpose — data control and analysis — their syntax and APIs vary altogether in certain aspects. If you’re familiar with Pandas, switching to Polars is moderately smooth, but a few key changes exist in data structures, method naming, and execution style.

In this segment, we are going to compare common data operations in Pandas vs. Polars to highlight their syntactical and functional contrasts.

1. Creating a DataFrame

📌 Pandas Approach:

import pandas as pd
data = {'Product': ['Laptop', 'Phone', 'Tablet'],
'Price': [1000, 500, 300]}
df_pandas = pd.DataFrame(data)
print(df_pandas)

📌 Polars Approach:

import polars as pl
df_polars = pl.DataFrame({
'Product': ['Laptop', 'Phone', 'Tablet'],
'Price': [1000, 500, 300]
})
print(df_polars)

Key Difference: Polars requires explicit pl.DataFrame() instead of pd.DataFrame(), but the structure remains similar.

2. Selecting Columns

📌 Pandas Approach:

df_pandas['Price']

📌 Polars Approach:

df_polars.select('Price')

Key Difference: In Polars, .select() is used for column selection instead of directly indexing with brackets.

3. Filtering Data

📌 Pandas Approach:

df_pandas[df_pandas['Price'] > 500]

📌 Polars Approach:

df_polars.filter(pl.col('Price') > 500)

Key Difference: Instead of using boolean indexing like Pandas, Polars requires .filter() with pl.col().

4. GroupBy and Aggregation

📌 Pandas Approach:

df_pandas.groupby('Product')['Price'].sum()

📌 Polars Approach:

df_polars.groupby('Product').agg(pl.col('Price').sum())

Key Difference: Polars requires pl.col() inside .agg() for aggregations.

5. Merging Two DataFrames

📌 Pandas Approach:

df_merged = df_pandas.merge(df_other, on='Product', how='inner')

📌 Polars Approach:

df_merged = df_polars.join(df_other, on='Product', how='inner')

Key Difference: Polars uses .join() instead of .merge(), making the syntax more SQL-like.

6. Sorting Data

📌Pandas Approach:

df_pandas.sort_values(by='Price', ascending=False)

📌 Polars Approach:

df_polars.sort('Price', descending=True)

Key Difference: Polars uses .sort() instead of .sort_values() and uses descending=True.

Syntax Differences Summary

How Easy Is It to Transition from Pandas to Polars?

What’s Similar?

• The basic dataframe structure is almost identical.
• Operations like filtering, sorting, and aggregating follow the same concepts.
• Method names are generally intuitive and easy to understand.

What’s Different?

• Lazy execution vs. eager execution (as covered in the previous section).
• Use of pl.col() for column operations instead of direct references.
• Different syntax for merging, selecting, and sorting operations.

For most Pandas users, transitioning to Polars is straightforward, but adapting to lazy execution and method naming differences may require some practice.

Next Section Preview

Now that we’ve covered the syntax differences, the next section will explore real-world use cases where Polars outperform Pandas, demonstrating when and why you should choose Polars for data processing.

Real-World Utilization Cases

The move from Pandas to Polars isn’t just about hypothetical execution improvements — it’s almost a real-world impact. Numerous businesses depend on quick, proficient data handling, and Polars is proving to be a game-changer in ranges where Pandas battles with huge datasets and execution bottlenecks.

Let’s investigate a few key businesses and applications where Polars is contrasting.

1. Big Data Processing

Challenge: Pandas faces problems while handling millions or billions of rows efficiently due to single-threaded execution and high memory consumption.

How Polars Helps:

• Polars have Multi-threaded execution, which allows for the utilization of all available CPU cores.
• Using lazy evaluation for query execution helps to avoid unnecessary computations.
• Apache Arrow based memory management system that allows for handling large datasets efficiently.

Example: A financial company working on terabytes of transaction data found that Polars reduced processing time from 3 hours (Pandas) to just 20 minutes by leveraging parallel computing.

2. Financial Analytics & Time Series Analysis

Challenge: Pandas often performs weakly for large-scale datasets that require complex time-series analysis, forecasting, and anomaly detection.

How Polars Helps:

• Vectorized operations help in faster clustering and conversion.
• Better memory efficiency means analysts can handle larger datasets without affecting the system.
• Optimized GroupBy operations make trend analysis and rolling window analysis much faster.

Example: A hedge fund processing 5 years of stock market data (over 2 billion rows) used Polars for real-time trend detection, cutting analysis time from 45 minutes (Pandas) to under 5 minutes.

3. Machine Learning Pipelines

Challenge: Pandas is commonly used for data preprocessing in machine learning, but it becomes a bottleneck problem while handling large datasets before training models.

How Polars Helps:

• Faster data cleaning and transformation using multi-threaded operations.
• Efficient feature engineering with faster clustering and joins.
• Better integration with ML libraries (e.g., Scikit-learn, TensorFlow, PyTorch).

Example: A machine learning team preprocessing 100GB of customer behavior data found that feature engineering tasks that took 25 minutes in Pandas were completed in under 3 minutes with Polars.

4. ETL (Extract, Transform, Load) Pipelines

Challenge: Pandas is regularly utilized in ETL workflows, but it does not scale well for huge datasets and real-time processing.

How Polars Helps:

• Lazy execution optimizes changes, reducing unnecessary computations.
• Integration with cloud stages (AWS, Google Cloud, Azure) for adaptable ETL pipelines.
• Altogether faster joins and aggregations, making data preprocessing more effective.

Example: A data engineering team migrating ETL processes to Google Cloud, replacing Pandas with Polars, reducing data transformation time from 90 minutes to just 10 minutes.

5. Real-Time Data Processing in IoT & Streaming Applications

Challenge: IoT devices that generate huge volumes of real-time data, which Pandas cannot efficiently process in streaming environments.

How Polars Helps:

• Real-time aggregation and filtration using high-frequency sensor data.
• Effective handling of time-series data in industrial automation.
• Compatibility with streaming platforms like Apache Kafka & Spark.

Example: A smart city project analyzing millions of IoT sensor readings per minute replaced Pandas with Polars, reducing processing time from 10 seconds to under 1 second per batch.

When Should You Use Polars Over Pandas?

Polars is ideal for:

• Large-scale data processing (millions to billions of rows).
• Real-time analytics and streaming applications.
• ML pipelines using preprocessing speed crucially.
• Finance, e-commerce, and IoT applications that require fast aggregations.

In case your dataset fits into memory and execution isn’t a concern, Pandas is still an extraordinary choice. But for high-performance, versatile data preparation, Polars is for the long run.

Next Section Preview

Presently that we’ve seen where Polars exceeds expectations in real-world applications, the another area will investigate how Polars coordinates with other data science tools like NumPy, PySpark, and machine learning systems.

Integration with Other data Science tools

The most thought whereas employing a cutting edge information science library is how well it works with other existing apparatuses. Since Pandas has been the industry standard for a long time, various information science workflows depend on its compatibility with NumPy, Scikit-learn, PySpark, and cloud-based information platforms.

Fortunately, Polars is arranged to routinely work with other information science devices, guaranteeing that clients can utilize its speed and efficiency without aggravating their existing workflows.

1. Polars and NumPy: Can They Work Together?

Why it matters: NumPy is the foundation of numerical computing in Python, and Pandas intensely depends on NumPy clusters. Polars, be that as it may, employments Apache Arrow as its basic data format.

How Polars integrates with NumPy:

• Change over a Polars DataFrame to a NumPy array:

import polars as pl
import numpy as np
df = pl.DataFrame({"A": [4, 5, 6], "B": [7, 8, 9]})
numpy_array = df.to_numpy()
print(numpy_array)

• Change over a NumPy cluster to a Polars DataFrame:

df_polars = pl.DataFrame(np.array([[1, 2], [3, 4], [5, 6]]), schema=["Col1", "Col2"])
print(df_polars)

Key Advantage: Clients moving from Pandas can still work with NumPy clusters’ interior Polars-based workflows.

2. Utilizing Polars with PySpark for Distributed Data Processing

Why it matters: Spark is broadly utilized for huge data processing and distributed computing, but Pandas frequently struggles to prepare large-scale Spark DataFrames effectively.

How Polars integrates with PySpark:

• Change over a Spark DataFrame to a Polars DataFrame:

from pyspark.sql import SparkSession
import polars as pl
spark = SparkSession.builder.appName("example").getOrCreate()
spark_df = spark.createDataFrame([(1, "A"), (2, "B")], ["ID", "Value"])
# Change over a Spark DataFrame to Pandas first, then to Polars
polars_df = pl.DataFrame(spark_df.toPandas())
print(polars_df)

Key Advantage: Polars can speed up in-memory handling of Spark DataFrames without requiring a costly framework.

3. Integrating Polars with Scikit-Learn for Machine Learning

Why it matters: Scikit-learn is one of the foremost prevalent machine learning libraries, and Pandas DataFrames are often as possible utilized for feature engineering.

How Polars integrates with Scikit-learn:

• Convert a Polars DataFrame to a Scikit-learn-friendly NumPy array:

from sklearn.preprocessing import StandardScaler
import polars as pl
df = pl.DataFrame({"Feature1": [40, 50, 60], "Feature2": [70, 80, 90]})
scaler = StandardScaler()
# Change over to NumPy array for Scikit-learn
scaled_data = scaler.fit_transform(df.to_numpy())
print(scaled_data)

Key Advantage: Data scientists can preprocess huge datasets utilizing Polars’ speed, sometimes before training ML models in Scikit-learn.

4. Compatibility with Cloud and Huge Data Platforms

Why it matters: Numerous businesses store and prepare data in cloud-based stages like AWS, Google Cloud, and Azure, where data formats like Parquet, Bolt, and CSV are commonly utilized.

How Polars integrates with cloud platforms:

• Read from Parquet files (used in cloud storage):

df = pl.read_parquet("s3://my-bucket/data.parquet")

• Read from a database (PostgreSQL, MySQL, etc.):

import polars as pl
import sqlite3
conn = sqlite3.connect("database.db")
df = pl.read_database("SELECT * FROM sales", conn)
print(df)

Key Advantage: Polars consistently coordinates with advanced cloud-based capacity and enormous data framework, making it perfect for enterprise-level data workflows.

5. Conversion Between Pandas and Polars

Why it matters: Many existing data science ventures still utilize Pandas, so being able to switch between Pandas and Polars effectively is crucial.

How to convert between Pandas and Polars:

• Convert Pandas DataFrame to Polars:

import pandas as pd
import polars as pl
df_pandas = pd.DataFrame({"A": [4, 5, 6], "B": [7, 8, 9]})
df_polars = pl.from_pandas(df_pandas)
print(df_polars)

• Convert Polars DataFrame to Pandas:

df_pandas_converted = df_polars.to_pandas()
print(df_pandas_converted)

Key Advantage: Users transitioning from Pandas to Polars can still interact with Pandas-based tools when needed.

Summary: Why Polars is a Versatile Choice

Next Section Preview

Now that we’ve investigated how Polars coordinates with other data science tools, the following section will jump into its challenges and restrictions. Since Polars is quick, it’s not the perfect solution.

Challenges and Restrictions of Polars

Whereas Polars is altogether quicker and more memory-efficient than Pandas, it isn’t a one-size-fits-all arrangement. As with any unused innovation, there are certain challenges and restrictions that users ought to be mindful of some time recently before transitioning to Polars.

1. Learning Curve: Adjusting to a New Syntax

Challenge: Users familiar with Pandas may find Polars’ syntax unfamiliar at first, especially with the use of lazy execution and the requirement to use pl.col() for column operations.

Why It’s a Challenge: Polars does not support standard Pandas-like operations such as df[“column”] > 1000. Instead, users must write:

df.filter(pl.col("column") > 1000)

• Users transitioning from Pandas need to learn new method names (e.g., .join() instead of .merge(), .select() instead of direct column indexing).

Workaround: The Polars documentation provides a Pandas-to-Polars conversion guide, and most operations have intuitive equivalents once users get used to them.

2. Missing Some Pandas Features

Challenge: Although Polars is evolving rapidly, it does not yet support all Pandas functionalities, especially in certain statistical and plotting operations.

Why It’s a Challenge:

• Limited built-in statistical functions (e.g., .describe() in Pandas provides detailed statistics, while Polars’ equivalent is more limited).
• No built-in visualization (Pandas integrates well with Matplotlib, whereas Polars requires converting back to Pandas for plotting).

Workaround:

• Convert Polars DataFrames back to Pandas when needed for plotting:

df_pandas = df_polars.to_pandas()
df_pandas.plot(kind="bar")

• Use third-party statistical libraries like NumPy and SciPy to fill in missing gaps.

3. Community Support & Ecosystem Maturity

Challenge: Compared to Pandas, which has been around for over a decade, Polars is relatively new, meaning fewer tutorials, Stack Overflow discussions, and third-party libraries.

Why It’s a Challenge:

• Smaller community support than Pandas.
• Fewer online resources and courses are available for learning.
• Some third-party Python libraries don’t yet support Polars natively.

Workaround:

• Join the Polars GitHub discussions and community forums to get help from other users.
• Follow the official Polars documentation and example notebooks.

4. Compatibility Issues with Legacy Codebases

Challenge: Many businesses have built their data pipelines, APIs, and machine learning workflows around Pandas. Rewriting everything in Polars is not always feasible.

Why It’s a Challenge:

• Large enterprises heavily rely on Pandas, and rewriting scripts in Polars may introduce integration issues.
• Some third-party data science libraries (e.g., Statsmodels, Seaborn) do not yet support Polars.

Workaround:

• Convert between Polars and Pandas where needed:

df_pandas = df_polars.to_pandas()
df_polars = pl.from_pandas(df_pandas)

• Use Polars for performance-intensive parts of the workflow and keep Pandas for the rest.

5. When Not to Use Polars

Polars May Not Be the Best Choice If:

• Your dataset is small (under 100,000 rows), and performance is not a concern.
• You need extensive statistical or plotting functions that are built into Pandas.
• You work with third-party libraries that do not yet support Polars.
• Your team is deeply invested in Pandas-based workflows with no urgent need to switch.

When to Use Polars:

• You work with large datasets (millions to billions of rows).
• Performance and memory efficiency are critical.
• Your workflow includes heavy transformations, aggregations, or joins.
• You want to leverage multi-threading for faster processing.

Next Section Preview

While Polars is incredibly fast, it is not a perfect replacement for Pandas in all cases. In the next section, we’ll discuss whether Polars will replace Pandas and where each tool fits in the future of data science.

The Future of Data Science Libraries: Will Polars Replace Pandas?

The rise of Polars as a high-performance alternative to Pandas has started a wrangle within the data science community: Will Polars replace Pandas as the industry standard?

Whereas Polars offers speedier execution, way better memory productivity, and modern data processing strategies, Pandas remains deeply embedded in existing data science workflows, machine learning pipelines, and enterprise applications. The genuine question isn’t whether Polars will replace Pandas but how both libraries will advance to meet the developing requests of data science.

1. Will Polars Become the Modern Standard?

📌 Why Polars May Overtake Pandas

Execution & Adaptability:

• Multi-threading permits Polars to completely utilize CPU cores, making it up to 10x quicker than Pandas.
• Lazy execution optimizes computations, sometimes recent execution, sparing time and memory.
• Proficient dealing with of huge data makes it perfect for real-time analytics, cloud computing, and large-scale ETL pipelines.

Modern Architecture:

• Columnar capacity arrangement (Apache Bolt) improves memory proficiency.
• Better integration with present-day data environments (Spark, Dask, cloud platforms).
• Designed with huge data in mind, while Pandas was initially built for smaller datasets.

📌 Why Pandas is Still Relevant

Expansive environment & library support:

• Pandas is significantly coordinated with the Python information science stack, working reliably with NumPy, Scikit-learn, TensorFlow, and Matplotlib.
• Various third-party libraries still depend on Pandas as their default information structure.

Develop and well-documented:

• Over a decade of improvement, a broad community base, and a gigantic engineer base.
• Thousands of instructional exercises, Stack Overflow answers, and existing codebases using Pandas make it simpler to memorize and troubleshoot.

Decision: Polars will not fully supplant Pandas within the near future, but it is likely to gotten to be the favored choice for enormous data applications, real-time analytics, and high-performance information pipelines.

2. How Pandas is Evolving to Compete with Polars

Recognizing its performance limitations, the Pandas team is making improvements to stay relevant:

Pandas 2.0 Enhancements (Leveraging Apache Arrow)

• Future versions of Pandas aim to adopt Apache Arrow-based backends, improving speed and memory efficiency.
• Optimized multi-threading support is being explored.

Improved Compatibility with Big Data

• Efforts to integrate with Dask and Modin (Pandas-like libraries optimized for parallel computing).
• More seamless support for cloud-based and distributed data processing.

What This Means: Instead of being replaced, Pandas will likely borrow concepts from Polars, improving performance while maintaining its wide adoption and ecosystem support.

3. Where Polars Fits in the Future of Data Science

Who Should Use Polars?

• Data engineers work with large-scale datasets (millions to billions of rows).
• Data scientists need fast transformations for machine learning pipelines.
• Businesses are building real-time analytics systems (finance, IoT, e-commerce).

Who Should Stick with Pandas?

• Beginners and those working with smaller datasets.
• Teams using existing Pandas-based workflows and ML libraries.
• Users rely on statistical functions and visualization tools (Seaborn, Matplotlib).

What’s Next?
— Instead of Pandas vs. Polars, the future may involve hybrid workflows where:

• Pandas remains the standard for smaller tasks and existing tools.
• Polars becomes the go-to for performance-intensive operations.
• Future libraries combine the best of both worlds, optimizing speed and usability.

Final Thoughts

Will Polars supplant Pandas? Not totally, but it’ll likely overwhelm high-performance data science applications.

What’s the future? Anticipate both Polars and Pandas to advance, borrowing concepts from each other to form speedier, more effective data science tools.

Within another area, we’ll examine how to get started with Polars, including establishment, key learning assets, and beginner-friendly instructional exercises.

Getting Started with Polars

If you’re prepared to investigate Polars and take advantage of its speed and proficiency, this area will direct you through the establishment, fundamental operations, and learning assets to get started.

1. Installing Polars

• Polars is easy to install and supports Python 3.7+. You can install it using pip:

pip install polars

• For better performance when handling Parquet and Arrow files, install additional dependencies:

pip install polars[all]

• Verification: After installation, check if Polars is installed correctly:

import polars as pl
print(pl.__version__)

2. Creating Your First Polars DataFrame

Once installed, let’s create a simple DataFrame using Polars:

import polars as pl
df = pl.DataFrame({
"Product": ["Laptop", "Phone", "Tablet"],
"Price": [1000, 500, 300]
})
print(df)

Output:

shape: (3, 2)
┌──────────┬───────┐
│ Product │ Price │
│ - - │ - - │
│ str │ i64 │
├──────────┼───────┤
│ Laptop │ 1000 │
│ Phone │ 500 │
│ Tablet │ 300 │
└──────────┴───────┘

Note: Unlike Pandas, Polars automatically formats and displays DataFrames in a structured table view.

3. Essential Polars Operations

• Selecting a Column:

df.select("Price")

• Filtering Data:

df.filter(pl.col("Price") > 500)

• Grouping and Aggregation:

df.groupby("Product").agg(pl.col("Price").sum())

• Sorting Data:

df.sort("Price", descending=True)

• Merging Two DataFrames:

df2 = pl.DataFrame({"Product": ["Laptop", "Phone"], "Stock": [50, 150]})
df.join(df2, on="Product", how="inner")

Polars provides an intuitive API that is both familiar to Pandas users and optimized for performance.

4. Reading and Writing Data

• Reading CSV Files:

df = pl.read_csv("sales_data.csv")

• Reading Parquet Files:

df = pl.read_parquet("data.parquet")

• Writing Data to CSV:

df.write_csv("output.csv")

• Writing Data to Parquet:

df.write_parquet("output.parquet")

Polars natively supports Apache Arrow and Parquet, making it ideal for large-scale data processing.

5. Learning Resources and Community Support

To dive deeper into Polars, check out these official and community-driven resources:

• Official Documentation: Polars Docs
• GitHub Repository: Polars GitHub
• Community Discussions: Polars Discord

Tip: Join the Polars Discord or GitHub discussions for real-time support from the community.

Next Section Preview

Now, you know how to get started with Polars, the upcoming final segment will summarize key takeaways and assist you if Polars is the correct device for your data science ventures.

Conclusion

As data science proceeds to advance, it requires quicker, more productive information preparation tools, which have never been more prominent. Polars have risen as an effective alternative to Pandas, advertising multi-threaded execution, lazy evaluation, and optimized memory usage — features that make it significantly speedier for handling the expansive datasets.

Key Takeaways:

• Pandas is still broadly utilized and remains the most excellent choice for small datasets, visualization, and legacy workflows.
• Polars exceeds expectations in execution, making it perfect for huge data analytics, ETL pipelines, and machine learning preprocessing.
• Syntax and API contrasts exist, but transitioning from Pandas to Polars is relatively smooth.
• Polars is coordinating well with cutting-edge data science libraries like NumPy, PySpark, and Scikit-learn.
• Polars isn’t a full substitution for Pandas, however, but it is forming the longer term of high-performance data science.

Should You Switch to Polars?

🚀 Utilize Polars in case:

• You work with huge datasets (millions+ lines).
• You wish for quicker preparation times for data transformation.
• Your workflow includes real-time data processing or enormous information applications.

🐼 Stick with Pandas in case:

• You’re working with small to medium datasets where execution isn’t a concern.
• You wish for broad factual, plotting, or machine learning integrations.
• Your company’s existing workflows and libraries intensely depend on Pandas.

Verdict

Rather than seeing it as Pandas vs. Polars, the long run of data science may include cross-breed workflows, where:

• Pandas handles small-scale assignments and legacy code.
• Polars is utilized for performance-intensive operations.
• Future libraries combine the most excellent of both universes, providing convenience and speed.

In any case of whichever apparatus you select, understanding both Pandas and Polars will make you a more flexible data researcher. The world of data science is moving towards speed, proficiency, and scalability, and Polars is at the cutting edge of that change.

Join thousands of data leaders on the AI newsletter. Join over 80,000 subscribers and keep up to date with the latest developments in AI. From research to projects and ideas. If you are building an AI startup, an AI-related product, or a service, we invite you to consider becoming a sponsor.

Published via Towards AI