home / github

Menu
  • Search all tables
  • GraphQL API

issue_comments

Table actions
  • GraphQL API for issue_comments

9 rows where author_association = "MEMBER" and issue = 146079798 sorted by updated_at descending

✎ View and edit SQL

This data as json, CSV (advanced)

Suggested facets: reactions, created_at (date), updated_at (date)

user 2

  • shoyer 5
  • jhamman 4

issue 1

  • modified: xarray/backends/api.py · 9 ✖

author_association 1

  • MEMBER · 9 ✖
id html_url issue_url node_id user created_at updated_at ▲ author_association body reactions performed_via_github_app issue
1411179632 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/817#issuecomment-1411179632 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/817 IC_kwDOAMm_X85UHORw jhamman 2443309 2023-01-31T22:51:57Z 2023-01-31T22:51:57Z MEMBER

Closing this as stale and out of date with our current backends. @swnesbitt (or others) - feel free to open a new PR if you feel there is more to do here.

{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
  modified: xarray/backends/api.py 146079798
388967090 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/817#issuecomment-388967090 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/817 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDM4ODk2NzA5MA== shoyer 1217238 2018-05-14T21:21:45Z 2018-05-14T21:21:45Z MEMBER

The only way we could make reading a gzipped netCDF4 file is to load the entire file into memory. That's why we didn't support this before. It's also less relevant for netCDF4, because netCDF4 supports in-file compression directly.

With netCDF3, we can use scipy's netcdf reader, which supports Python file objects. But netCDF4-Python does not support Python file objects.

This issue is concerned about supporting paths ending with .gz in remote URLs, which are not local files but rather files exposed via the OpenDAP protocol over a network. If the DAP server can server a file with a .gz extension then xarray should be OK with it, too.

{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
  modified: xarray/backends/api.py 146079798
388412798 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/817#issuecomment-388412798 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/817 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDM4ODQxMjc5OA== jhamman 2443309 2018-05-11T16:20:26Z 2018-05-11T16:20:26Z MEMBER

@tsaoyu - I don't think anyone has worked on developing a test case for this feature. I assume @swnesbitt would appreciate help there.

{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
  modified: xarray/backends/api.py 146079798
206465453 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/817#issuecomment-206465453 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/817 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDIwNjQ2NTQ1Mw== shoyer 1217238 2016-04-06T17:01:45Z 2017-07-13T18:55:12Z MEMBER

Currently the way we handle this is that the only test that accessing remote resources is the pydap test, which only runs in one build (not required to pass).

{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
  modified: xarray/backends/api.py 146079798
218362023 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/817#issuecomment-218362023 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/817 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDIxODM2MjAyMw== shoyer 1217238 2016-05-11T04:59:16Z 2016-05-11T04:59:16Z MEMBER

I am reluctant to merge this without having any way to test the logic. Without automated tests this issue is likely to recur.

That said, I suppose we could leave the refactoring for a TODO. Let's add a note on that and also one minimal test to verify that we raise an error if you try to use engine='netcdf4' with a path to local gzipped file.

{
    "total_count": 1,
    "+1": 1,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
  modified: xarray/backends/api.py 146079798
218359192 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/817#issuecomment-218359192 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/817 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDIxODM1OTE5Mg== jhamman 2443309 2016-05-11T04:31:46Z 2016-05-11T04:31:46Z MEMBER

@shoyer - are we okay with the final logic here?

@swnesbitt - can we get an entry in the what's new docs?

{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
  modified: xarray/backends/api.py 146079798
206464547 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/817#issuecomment-206464547 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/817 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDIwNjQ2NDU0Nw== jhamman 2443309 2016-04-06T16:59:58Z 2016-04-06T16:59:58Z MEMBER

Regarding testing, it would be good to have a test module that includes grabbing files for local access and accessing openDAP datasets (from UNIDATA?) to ensure that the installed backends are all working as expected.

I'd be a little hesitant to enforce that we get access to opendap (or other remote datasets) on travis. I've seen this come back to bite us in the past. We can allow tests to fail on travis and just print a warning via pytest if it is something we really want to see tested in that way.

{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
  modified: xarray/backends/api.py 146079798
206463565 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/817#issuecomment-206463565 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/817 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDIwNjQ2MzU2NQ== shoyer 1217238 2016-04-06T16:56:45Z 2016-04-06T16:56:45Z MEMBER

We do have existing tests for backends: https://github.com/pydata/xarray/blob/master/xarray/test/test_backends.py

This includes a test accessing an OpenDAP dataset from the OpenDAP test server (via pydap, at the end). But in my experience, there servers are somewhat unreliable (maybe available 90%), so we don't require that test to pass for the build to pass. Also, even in the best case scenario network access is slow. So it would be nice to modularize this enough that our logic is testable without actually using opendap.

{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
  modified: xarray/backends/api.py 146079798
206159316 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/817#issuecomment-206159316 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/817 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDIwNjE1OTMxNg== shoyer 1217238 2016-04-06T06:57:40Z 2016-04-06T06:57:40Z MEMBER

I think this is probably correct, but the heuristics here are starting to get convoluted enough that I worry about test coverage. Is there any way we can test this? Maybe try to pull the gzip logic into a helper function (an extended variant of _get_default_engine) that we could test?

{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
  modified: xarray/backends/api.py 146079798

Advanced export

JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited, object

CSV options:

CREATE TABLE [issue_comments] (
   [html_url] TEXT,
   [issue_url] TEXT,
   [id] INTEGER PRIMARY KEY,
   [node_id] TEXT,
   [user] INTEGER REFERENCES [users]([id]),
   [created_at] TEXT,
   [updated_at] TEXT,
   [author_association] TEXT,
   [body] TEXT,
   [reactions] TEXT,
   [performed_via_github_app] TEXT,
   [issue] INTEGER REFERENCES [issues]([id])
);
CREATE INDEX [idx_issue_comments_issue]
    ON [issue_comments] ([issue]);
CREATE INDEX [idx_issue_comments_user]
    ON [issue_comments] ([user]);
Powered by Datasette · Queries took 4240.047ms · About: xarray-datasette