html_url,issue_url,id,node_id,user,created_at,updated_at,author_association,body,reactions,performed_via_github_app,issue
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/6196#issuecomment-1450036767,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/6196,1450036767,IC_kwDOAMm_X85Wbc4f,32069530,2023-03-01T12:09:21Z,2023-03-01T12:09:40Z,NONE,"Hello @TomNicholas ,
Reopening this issue 1 year later ! To answer your last question, singleton dimension seems to have, indeed, a unique behavior since they are reattached systematically to other coordinates (even if they naturally do not share any dimension with other coordinates).
These singleton dimensions introduce some strange behavior. This is another example:
```
a = xr.DataArray(np.random.rand(2,3,2), dims=('x','y','z'), coords={'x':[1,2], 'y':[3,4,5],'z':['0','1']})
b = xr.DataArray(np.random.rand(2,3,2), dims=('x','y','z'), coords={'x':[1,2], 'y':[3,4,5],'z':['0','1']})
res1 = a.sel(z='0')/b
res2 = a.sel(z='0').expand_dims('z')/b
```
res1 and res2 do not have the same size on dimension ""z"". In res1, dimension ""z"" is not considered anymore as a dimension at all !
","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,1115166039
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/2805#issuecomment-1255029201,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2805,1255029201,IC_kwDOAMm_X85KzjnR,32069530,2022-09-22T13:30:26Z,2022-09-22T16:12:47Z,NONE,"Hello guys,
While waiting for a integrated solution. Here is a function that should do the job in a safe way. It returns an iterator
````
def xndindex(ds, dims=None):
if dims is None:
dims = ds.dims
elif type(dims) is str:
dims=[dims]
else:
pass
for d in dims:
if d not in ds.dims:
raise ValueError(""Invalid dimension '{}'. Available dimensions {}"".format(d, ds.dims))
iter_dict = {k:v for k,v in ds.sizes.items() if k in dims}
for d,k in zip(repeat(tuple(iter_dict.keys())),zip(np.ndindex(tuple(iter_dict.values())))):
yield {k:l for k,l in zip(d,k[0])}
````
Example of use
````
a = xr.DataArray(np.random.rand(4,3), dims=['x','y'], coords={'x':np.arange(4), 'y':np.arange(3)})
for i in xndindex(a):
print(a[i])
````
","{""total_count"": 2, ""+1"": 2, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,419543087
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/2805#issuecomment-1239645797,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2805,1239645797,IC_kwDOAMm_X85J435l,32069530,2022-09-07T16:53:34Z,2022-09-07T17:00:44Z,NONE,"Hi guys,
For now, when I want to iterate over all my dataset I use the simple (but dangerous I believe) workaround:
````
for i in np.ndindex(ds.shape):
res = ds[{d:j for d,j in zip(ds.dims,i)}]
````
but, I am not sure that ndindex will iterate in the good order relatively to the ds.dims return.
Is there any news on this topic ?
Many thanks !","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,419543087
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/1772#issuecomment-1085742545,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/1772,1085742545,IC_kwDOAMm_X85Atx3R,32069530,2022-04-01T10:42:20Z,2022-04-01T10:42:20Z,NONE,"I wake up this issue,
Any news ?","{""total_count"": 2, ""+1"": 2, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,280875330
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/6196#issuecomment-1026774266,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/6196,1026774266,IC_kwDOAMm_X849M1T6,32069530,2022-02-01T12:07:51Z,2022-02-01T12:07:51Z,NONE,"Thanks for the enlightening.
Actually, this coordinates dependency with singleton dimension caused me a problem when using the to_netcdf() function. No problem playing whith the xr.Dataset but I get some error when trying to write on disk using to_netcdf().
For now, I wasn't able to reproduce a minimalist example because the error disappears with minimalist example. I wasn't able to find the fundamental difference between the dataset causing the error and the minimalist one. Printing them are exactly the same. I have to do deeper inspection.
Concerning the philosophy of what a coordinate should be: For me the ""label"" idea is understandable at a dataset level. A singleton dimension become a (shared) ""label' for the whole dataset. This is ok for me. However, I do not understand why it should also be a ""label"" of the other coordinates of the dataset. A singleton dimension should not be ""more important"" than the other (not singleton) dimensions. Why the singleton dimension should become a ""label"" of another dimension while the other dimensions are not. This do not seem logical to me.","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,1115166039
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/6183#issuecomment-1022313564,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/6183,1022313564,IC_kwDOAMm_X84870Rc,32069530,2022-01-26T15:31:43Z,2022-01-26T15:31:43Z,NONE,"ok, thanks ! I will thus be patient","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,1110623911
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/5436#issuecomment-861792425,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/5436,861792425,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDg2MTc5MjQyNQ==,32069530,2021-06-15T20:00:29Z,2021-06-15T20:00:29Z,NONE,"an additional flag like ""keep_attrs"" is not feasible ? It would be a boolean","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,911513701
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/5436#issuecomment-854812439,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/5436,854812439,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDg1NDgxMjQzOQ==,32069530,2021-06-04T15:24:25Z,2021-06-04T15:24:25Z,NONE,"I understand but I still beleive that we should be able to control separately the attrs of the final dataset and the attrs of the merged dataArray inside (whatever the way they are passed to the merge function)
Thanks for the pint-xarray suggestion! I didn't know about it. I will look into it.
","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,911513701
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/5436#issuecomment-854768921,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/5436,854768921,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDg1NDc2ODkyMQ==,32069530,2021-06-04T14:27:07Z,2021-06-04T14:27:07Z,NONE,"Ok, I understand your point of view.
My question (or what you think could be a bug) thus becomes: why ""drop"" option removes attrs from the variables in the merged dataset while ""drop_conflicts"" and ""override"" keep them ?
It should thus be some way to say the merging to keep or not the attrs of each variables in the final dataset.
(I do not understand your comment: how to keep the units on the data instead of in the attributes ?)","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,911513701
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/5436#issuecomment-854739959,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/5436,854739959,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDg1NDczOTk1OQ==,32069530,2021-06-04T13:52:44Z,2021-06-04T13:52:44Z,NONE,"@keewis , do you think this behaviour to be the expected one ?","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,911513701
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/3946#issuecomment-611208139,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/3946,611208139,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDYxMTIwODEzOQ==,32069530,2020-04-08T21:37:45Z,2020-04-08T21:37:45Z,NONE,"@TomNicholas ,
Thanks for yor help. That is exactly what I wanted to do but, as you said there is probably a more efficent way to do it.
@dcherian I needed this function because I sometimes use the groupby_bins() function followed by a concatenantion along a new dimension. This can drastically increase memory due to the multiplication of other variables in a Dataset.
Independantly of my usage, having a function that remove redundant data seems interessant to me. There is probably other combination of function that can accidently duplicate data. ","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,595813283
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/3948#issuecomment-610402170,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/3948,610402170,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDYxMDQwMjE3MA==,32069530,2020-04-07T13:57:04Z,2020-04-07T13:57:04Z,NONE,"Hi, If results1 is already evaluated, just replace
""da1.release()"" with ""del da1"".
Python should automatically release the memory ","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,595882590
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/2605#issuecomment-562654929,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2605,562654929,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDU2MjY1NDkyOQ==,32069530,2019-12-06T17:02:05Z,2019-12-06T17:02:05Z,NONE,"Ho, sorry... I just see the PR... ","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,390774883
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/2605#issuecomment-562652648,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2605,562652648,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDU2MjY1MjY0OA==,32069530,2019-12-06T16:56:20Z,2019-12-06T16:56:20Z,NONE,"Hi,
I was looking to some xarray padding function and get this issue.
For the moment, I made a function of my own based on numpy.pad and xr.apply_ufunc
When possible, it also pad associated coordinates. If it can be of any help here...
Here it is:
```
def xpad(ds, dims={}):
""""""
Padding of xarray. Coordinate are linearly padded if original coordinates are evenly spaced. Otherwise, no new coordinates are affected to padded axis.
Padded dimension is named with prefix 'padded_'
Args:
ds (xarray): xarray
dims (dict): keys are dimensions along which to pad and values are padding tuple (see np.pad). (ex {'pulse:(10,0)})
Returns:
(xarray) : same as input with padded axis.
""""""
mypad = [(0,0) for n in ds.dims if n not in dims.keys()]
mypad+=list(dims.values())
padded_ds = xr.apply_ufunc(np.pad, ds, mypad,input_core_dims=[list(dims.keys()),[]], output_core_dims=[['padded_'+d for d in dims.keys()]], keep_attrs=True)
for var, ext in dims.items():
dvar = np.diff(ds[var])
if np.allclose(dvar, dvar[0]):
dvar = dvar[0]
left_bound, right_bound = (np.min(ds[var]).data, np.max(ds[var]).data) if dvar>0. else (np.max(ds[var]).data, np.min(ds[var]).data)
extended_var = np.append(ds[var].data, np.max(ds[var]).data+np.arange(1,ext[1]+1)*dvar)
extended_var = np.append(np.min(ds[var]).data+np.arange(-ext[0],0)*dvar, extended_var)
padded_ds = padded_ds.assign_coords(**{'padded_'+var:extended_var})
else:
print('Coordinates {} are not evenly spaced, padding is impossible'.format(var))
return padded_ds
```","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,390774883
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/659#issuecomment-522592263,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/659,522592263,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUyMjU5MjI2Mw==,32069530,2019-08-19T14:09:36Z,2019-08-19T14:09:36Z,NONE,"I gave a look to functions such as ""np.add.at"" which can be highly faster than home-made solution. The aggregate function of the ""numpy-groupies"" package is even faster (25 x faster than np.add.at in my case).
Maybe xarray groupby functionalities can rely on such effective package.","{""total_count"": 2, ""+1"": 2, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,117039129
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/2494#issuecomment-433393215,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2494,433393215,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQzMzM5MzIxNQ==,32069530,2018-10-26T12:37:30Z,2018-10-26T12:37:30Z,NONE,"Hi all,
I finally figured out my problem. On each independent process xr.open_mfdataset() seems to naturally try to do some multi-threaded access (even without parallel option ?). Each node of my cluster was configured in such a way that multi-threading was possible (my mistake). Here was my yaml config file used by PBSCluster()
```
jobqueue:
pbs:
name: dask-worker
# Dask worker options
cores: 56
processes: 28
```
I tough that the parallel=True option was to enable parallelized access for my independent process. It actually enable parallelized access for possible threads of each process.
Now, I have removed parallel=True from xr.open_mfdataset() call and ensure 1 thread by process by changing my config file:
```
cores: 28
processes: 28
```
Thanks again for your help
","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,371906566
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/2494#issuecomment-431796693,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2494,431796693,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQzMTc5NjY5Mw==,32069530,2018-10-22T10:27:04Z,2018-10-22T10:27:04Z,NONE,"@jhamman I was aware of the difference between the two parallel options. I was thus wondering if I could pass a parallel option to the netcdf4 library via the open_mfdataset() call. I tried to change the engine to netcdf4 and added the backend_kwarg :
`backend_kwargs={'parallel':True}`
but I get the same error.
I 'll try the suggestion of Stephan to see how it behaves and I will report back.
Thanks","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,371906566