issue_comments

Table actions

4 rows where author_association = "MEMBER" and issue = 636493109 sorted by updated_at descending

✎ View and edit SQL

This data as json, CSV (advanced)

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

issue 1

  • Should we make "rasterio" an engine option? · 4 ✖

author_association 1

  • MEMBER · 4 ✖
id html_url issue_url node_id user created_at updated_at ▲ author_association body reactions performed_via_github_app issue
849765207 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/4142#issuecomment-849765207 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4142 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDg0OTc2NTIwNw== keewis 14808389 2021-05-27T16:17:53Z 2021-05-27T16:17:53Z MEMBER

open_dataset("RGB.byte.tif", engine="rasterio") works if rioxarray>=0.4 is installed so I guess we can close this. For the deprecation see #4697.

 
{
    "total_count": 2,
    "+1": 1,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 1,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   Should we make "rasterio" an engine option? 636493109
814074112 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/4142#issuecomment-814074112 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4142 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDgxNDA3NDExMg== alexamici 226037 2021-04-06T12:18:43Z 2021-04-06T12:18:43Z MEMBER

I started a PR against rioxarray to add an engine via the plugin interface see https://github.com/corteva/rioxarray/pull/281

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   Should we make "rasterio" an engine option? 636493109
642554262 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/4142#issuecomment-642554262 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4142 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY0MjU1NDI2Mg== fmaussion 10050469 2020-06-11T10:20:02Z 2020-06-11T10:20:02Z MEMBER

As a not-so-active-but-still-interested xarray dev my opinion doesn't count much, but I would be a proponent of having the rasterio backend live outside of xarray proper.

At the time we wrote the rasterio->DataArray conversion we already noticed a lot of issues regarding differences between the two datamodels, and rio-xarray shows that there is a lot of logic and dev work necessary for this to go smoothly, which would be better handled outside of xarray. 

{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   Should we make "rasterio" an engine option? 636493109
642413509 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/4142#issuecomment-642413509 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4142 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY0MjQxMzUwOQ== jhamman 2443309 2020-06-11T05:18:37Z 2020-06-11T05:18:37Z MEMBER

Thanks @WeatherGod for opening this issue. It is good to have you back around these parts.

The main thing to consider at the moment is that we are about to start a major backend refactor (#1970). So I'd suggest holding on off on any major work that builds on our current DataStore implementation.

From an API design, I think it makes sense to revisit the rasterio->DataArray convention we currently have and instead treat rasterio like most other drivers and return a Dataset by default. For most applications, the following would be true:

python open_rasterio(...) == open_dataarray(..., engine='rasterio') == open_dataset(..., engine='rasterio')[default_var]

There's also the question of where the rasterio backend should live once #1970 is implemented. I think we can make a pretty strong argument that it should move out of xarray and into a 3rd party package. Perhaps rasterio itself, or, more likely something like rio-xarray (cc @snowman2). See #3166 for a demo of how this may work.

As you can see, there are a few big questions up in the air right now. Work on #1970 will begin this summer so now is a great time to game out the various options for the rasterio backend.

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   Should we make "rasterio" an engine option? 636493109

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]);