fix(preprocessors): stop CSVDocumentSplitter recursing forever on multi-block CSVs (#12190)

[Anai-Guo]

Related Issues

Fixes #12190

Proposed Changes

CSVDocumentSplitter.run() could raise RecursionError when both row_split_threshold and column_split_threshold are set and a later row block still needs a column split.

Root cause: _find_split_indices reports empty rows/columns using pandas index/column labels, while _split_dataframe removes them with positional .iloc slicing. For the top-level DataFrame the labels happen to equal the positions (a RangeIndex), so it works. But on a sub-table produced by an earlier split, the labels no longer match positions — e.g. an empty row at label 6 sits at position 1 in a 3-row sub-table. df.iloc[0:6] then returns the whole table unchanged, the empty row is never removed, and _recursive_split keeps re-detecting it and recurses until the interpreter's recursion limit is hit.

The fix detects empty rows/columns by position (enumerate over the boolean mask) so the split points stay consistent with the positional .iloc slicing. Sub-table index/column labels are left untouched, so the row_idx_start / col_idx_start metadata (read from split_df.index[0] / split_df.columns[0]) is unchanged. For the top-level DataFrame, positions equal labels, so existing behavior — including the _find_split_indices unit tests — is preserved.

How did you test it?

• Added a regression test (test_recursive_split_later_block_needs_column_split) using the exact CSV from the issue; it previously hit RecursionError and now returns 4 sub-tables with the correct content and metadata.
• Verified the existing TestFindSplitIndices, test_recursive_split_one_level, and test_recursive_split_two_levels cases still produce identical results.

Checklist

• I have read the contributors guidelines and the code of conduct
• I have updated the related issue with new insights and changes
• I added tests that demonstrate the correct behavior of the change
• I've used one of the conventional commit types for my PR title
• I documented my code
• I ran pre-commit hooks and fixed any issue

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[vercel]

@Anai-Guo is attempting to deploy a commit to the deepset Team on Vercel.

A member of the Team first needs to authorize it.

[CLAassistant]

Thank you for your submission! We really appreciate it. Like many open source projects, we ask that you sign our Contributor License Agreement before we can accept your contribution.
_{You have signed the CLA already but the status is still pending? Let us recheck it.}

[HaystackBot]

Hi @Anai-Guo, thanks a lot for your contribution! 🙏

We noticed that the Contributor License Agreement (CLA) check (license/cla) hasn't passed yet, so we've temporarily moved this PR to draft and paused the review assignment.

To get your PR reviewed, please sign the CLA via the link in the license/cla check below (or in the CLA bot comment). As soon as the check turns green, this PR will automatically be marked ready for review again and a reviewer will be re-assigned.