issue_comments
14 rows where author_association = "MEMBER" and issue = 314764258 sorted by updated_at descending
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
Suggested facets: reactions, created_at (date), updated_at (date)
issue 1
- concat_dim getting added to *all* variables of multifile datasets · 14 ✖
id | html_url | issue_url | node_id | user | created_at | updated_at ▲ | author_association | body | reactions | performed_via_github_app | issue |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
531818131 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/2064#issuecomment-531818131 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2064 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUzMTgxODEzMQ== | dcherian 2448579 | 2019-09-16T15:03:12Z | 2019-09-16T15:03:12Z | MEMBER | #3239 has been merged. Now What's left is to change defaults to implement @shoyer's comment
|
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
concat_dim getting added to *all* variables of multifile datasets 314764258 | |
524021001 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/2064#issuecomment-524021001 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2064 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUyNDAyMTAwMQ== | dcherian 2448579 | 2019-08-22T18:22:37Z | 2019-08-22T18:22:37Z | MEMBER | Thanks for your input @bonnland.
We do have a What's under discussion here is what to do about variables duplicated across datasets or indeed, how do we know that these variables are duplicated across datasets when concatenating other variables. |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
concat_dim getting added to *all* variables of multifile datasets 314764258 | |
523960862 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/2064#issuecomment-523960862 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2064 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUyMzk2MDg2Mg== | dcherian 2448579 | 2019-08-22T15:42:10Z | 2019-08-22T15:42:10Z | MEMBER | I have a draft solution in #3239. It adds a new mode called "sensible" that acts like "all" when the concat dimension doesn't exist in the dataset and acts like "minimal" when the dimension is present. We can decide whether this is the right way i.e. add a new mode but the more fundamental problem is below. The issue is dealing with variables that should not be concatentated in "minimal" mode (e.g. time-invariant non dim coords when concatenating in time). In this case, we want to skip the equality checks in I thought the clean way to do this would be to add the However, So do we want to support all the other @shoyer What do you think? |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
concat_dim getting added to *all* variables of multifile datasets 314764258 | |
519149757 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/2064#issuecomment-519149757 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2064 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUxOTE0OTc1Nw== | dcherian 2448579 | 2019-08-07T15:32:16Z | 2019-08-07T15:32:16Z | MEMBER |
I'm in favour of this. What should we name this mode? One comment on "existing dimensions" mode:
For variables without the dimension, this will still raise a |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
concat_dim getting added to *all* variables of multifile datasets 314764258 | |
512036050 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/2064#issuecomment-512036050 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2064 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUxMjAzNjA1MA== | shoyer 1217238 | 2019-07-16T23:09:24Z | 2019-07-16T23:09:24Z | MEMBER |
This seems very likely to me. The existing behavior of Xarray's unit test suite is definitely a good "smoke test" for understanding the impact of changes to The tests we should feel free to rewrite are cases where we set |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
concat_dim getting added to *all* variables of multifile datasets 314764258 | |
512000102 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/2064#issuecomment-512000102 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2064 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUxMjAwMDEwMg== | shoyer 1217238 | 2019-07-16T21:44:52Z | 2019-07-16T21:44:52Z | MEMBER |
Can you give a specific example of the behavior in question? |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
concat_dim getting added to *all* variables of multifile datasets 314764258 | |
511611430 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/2064#issuecomment-511611430 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2064 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUxMTYxMTQzMA== | shoyer 1217238 | 2019-07-15T23:54:47Z | 2019-07-15T23:54:47Z | MEMBER | The logic for determining which variables to concatenate is in the Only Right now we also have Recall that Here's my notebook testing this out: https://gist.github.com/shoyer/f44300eddda4f7c476c61f76d1df938b So I'm thinking that we probably want to combine "all" and "minimal" into a single mode to use as the default, and remove the other behavior, which is either useless or broken. Maybe it would make sense to come up with a new name for this mode, and to make both |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
concat_dim getting added to *all* variables of multifile datasets 314764258 | |
511468454 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/2064#issuecomment-511468454 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2064 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUxMTQ2ODQ1NA== | dcherian 2448579 | 2019-07-15T16:15:51Z | 2019-07-15T16:15:51Z | MEMBER | @bonnland I don't think you want to change the default
|
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
concat_dim getting added to *all* variables of multifile datasets 314764258 | |
381975937 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/2064#issuecomment-381975937 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2064 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDM4MTk3NTkzNw== | rabernat 1197350 | 2018-04-17T12:34:15Z | 2018-04-17T12:34:15Z | MEMBER | I'm glad! FWIW, I think this is a relatively simple fix within xarray. @xylar, if you are game, we would love to see a PR from you. Could be a good opportunity to learn more about xarray internals. |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
concat_dim getting added to *all* variables of multifile datasets 314764258 | |
381728814 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/2064#issuecomment-381728814 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2064 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDM4MTcyODgxNA== | shoyer 1217238 | 2018-04-16T19:55:24Z | 2018-04-16T19:55:24Z | MEMBER |
OK, in that case I think #2048 was still the right change/bug-fix, making multi-file and single-file behavior consistent. But you certainly have exposed a real issue here.
Yes, we shouldn't implicitly add a new dimensions to variables in the case where the dimension already exists in the dataset. We only need the heuristics/comparisons when an entirely new dimension is being added. |
{ "total_count": 1, "+1": 1, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
concat_dim getting added to *all* variables of multifile datasets 314764258 | |
381725478 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/2064#issuecomment-381725478 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2064 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDM4MTcyNTQ3OA== | rabernat 1197350 | 2018-04-16T19:44:00Z | 2018-04-16T19:44:00Z | MEMBER | But this issue raises an important basic point: we might want different behavior for variables in which |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
concat_dim getting added to *all* variables of multifile datasets 314764258 | |
381722944 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/2064#issuecomment-381722944 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2064 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDM4MTcyMjk0NA== | rabernat 1197350 | 2018-04-16T19:35:12Z | 2018-04-16T19:35:12Z | MEMBER |
Exactly. They are coordinates. Those variables are usually related to grid geometry or constants, as I presume is |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
concat_dim getting added to *all* variables of multifile datasets 314764258 | |
381717472 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/2064#issuecomment-381717472 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2064 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDM4MTcxNzQ3Mg== | rabernat 1197350 | 2018-04-16T19:15:19Z | 2018-04-16T19:15:19Z | MEMBER | 👍 This is a persistent problem for me as well. I often find myself writing a preprocessor function like this
The reason to drop the coordinates is to avoid the comparison that happens when you concatenate coords. |
{ "total_count": 1, "+1": 1, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
concat_dim getting added to *all* variables of multifile datasets 314764258 | |
381707540 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/2064#issuecomment-381707540 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2064 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDM4MTcwNzU0MA== | shoyer 1217238 | 2018-04-16T18:42:06Z | 2018-04-16T18:42:06Z | MEMBER | What happens if you open multiple files with |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
concat_dim getting added to *all* variables of multifile datasets 314764258 |
Advanced export
JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited, object
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]);
user 3