-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18
Issue #13299 Asyncronous download of specific parameters to CSV and N… #65
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Changes from 1 commit
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -130,14 +130,18 @@ def _deployment_particles(self, ds, stream_key, parameters, external_includes): | |
| if lat_data is not None and lon_data is not None: | ||
| data['lat'] = lat_data | ||
| data['lon'] = lon_data | ||
| params.extend(('lat', 'lon')) | ||
| # always include lat/lon | ||
| params.extend(('lat', 'lon')) | ||
|
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Is it correct to include lat/lon when we do not have values for them?
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. lines 127 - 132 apply to gliders only and essentially rename GPS based lat/lon as simply lat or lon. Some non-glider data does have lat/lon, e.g. GI01SUMO_RID16_02_FLORTD000, which were not being reported. At this point, we are actually saying we want to include lat/lon; if they are not available, they are reported as missing in lines 161 - 163 and removed from the requested param list in 165. I think it is more efficient to do this than to attempt to determine ahead of time if lat/lon are available. |
||
|
|
||
| # remaining externals | ||
|
|
||
| # remaining externals. rename the parameter without the stream_name prefix (12544 AC1) | ||
| for sk in external_includes: | ||
| for param in external_includes[sk]: | ||
| name = '-'.join((sk.stream_name, param.name)) | ||
| if name in data: | ||
| params.append(name) | ||
| extern_data = data.pop(name) | ||
| data[param.name] = extern_data | ||
| params.append(param.name) | ||
|
|
||
| if self.stream_request.include_provenance: | ||
| params.append('provenance') | ||
|
|
||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
for csv's and json they don't have the extra metadata for each variables that netcdf has to identifies the actual stream from which the parameter came from. netcdf can get away with removing the stream name from the variable because it has additional metadata attributes that help identify the true source of the data.
removing the stream name introduces a change in the interface of the data which may break user developed m2m tools. before implementing this change for csv's and json we probably should get feedback from the user community if this is what they want.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Agreed. Will pull the name changes and update the ticket to request input/direction from the user community.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think this will also correct the test failure.