Hi y'all,
As noted in #333, I've been testing clam w/ loci having highly variable coverage. One thing that I've noticed in these runs (and during snparcher runs, more generally) is that clam seems to mostly run in single-threaded mode. As a result, test runs inputting different parameters for clam are [really] slow.
After activating the correct conda environment, i've been running clam manually:
clam loci -o bcf-callable_loci.INF.zarr -t 24 --per-sample -m 10 depths.zarr/ &> bcf-callable_loci.zarr.INF.log
At first, there seems to be some activity involving multiple cores/threads, but after a while, CPU activity drops from >100% (usually around 400-600%) to 95-100%, where it stays. I haven't investigate the clam code - so this may be expected behavior (although it seems suspect).
This is clam 1.1.4 which was packaged up in snparcher v2.1. Also happy to move this over to the clam page, but I figured I would report here given #333.
Thanks!
-b
Hi y'all,
As noted in #333, I've been testing
clamw/ loci having highly variable coverage. One thing that I've noticed in these runs (and during snparcher runs, more generally) is thatclamseems to mostly run in single-threaded mode. As a result, test runs inputting different parameters forclamare [really] slow.After activating the correct conda environment, i've been running clam manually:
At first, there seems to be some activity involving multiple cores/threads, but after a while, CPU activity drops from >100% (usually around 400-600%) to 95-100%, where it stays. I haven't investigate the clam code - so this may be expected behavior (although it seems suspect).
This is
clam 1.1.4which was packaged up insnparcher v2.1. Also happy to move this over to theclampage, but I figured I would report here given #333.Thanks!
-b