issue_comments
6 rows where issue = 1020282789 sorted by updated_at descending
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
Suggested facets: reactions, created_at (date), updated_at (date)
issue 1
- Why are `da.chunks` and `ds.chunks` properties inconsistent? · 6 ✖
id | html_url | issue_url | node_id | user | created_at | updated_at ▲ | author_association | body | reactions | performed_via_github_app | issue |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
950217824 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/5843#issuecomment-950217824 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/5843 | IC_kwDOAMm_X844oyxg | max-sixty 5635139 | 2021-10-23T21:23:52Z | 2021-10-23T21:23:52Z | MEMBER | Agree! Now we just need to decide between |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Why are `da.chunks` and `ds.chunks` properties inconsistent? 1020282789 | |
942459595 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/5843#issuecomment-942459595 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/5843 | IC_kwDOAMm_X844LMrL | TomNicholas 35968931 | 2021-10-13T16:09:15Z | 2021-10-13T16:09:15Z | MEMBER |
That's a good suggestion - then we can have backwards compatibility whilst also allowing intuitive code that treats dataarrays and datasets similarly, e.g:
I think |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Why are `da.chunks` and `ds.chunks` properties inconsistent? 1020282789 | |
939718939 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/5843#issuecomment-939718939 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/5843 | IC_kwDOAMm_X844Avkb | dcherian 2448579 | 2021-10-11T06:22:24Z | 2021-10-11T06:22:24Z | MEMBER | For DataArrays there is an underlying It seems better to introduce a new property on both DataArrays and Datasets that always returns a dict (Like There is a similar problem for |
{ "total_count": 1, "+1": 1, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Why are `da.chunks` and `ds.chunks` properties inconsistent? 1020282789 | |
938237555 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/5843#issuecomment-938237555 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/5843 | IC_kwDOAMm_X8437F5z | TomNicholas 35968931 | 2021-10-08T00:03:36Z | 2021-10-08T00:03:36Z | MEMBER |
I guessed that might be the case!
Still leaves this question though ^ . I made a draft PR in https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/5846. |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Why are `da.chunks` and `ds.chunks` properties inconsistent? 1020282789 | |
938235021 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/5843#issuecomment-938235021 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/5843 | IC_kwDOAMm_X8437FSN | shoyer 1217238 | 2021-10-07T23:56:54Z | 2021-10-07T23:56:54Z | MEMBER | The honest answer is that I didn't think too carefully about this when originally implementing Xarray's Dask wrapper back in 2015.
|
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Why are `da.chunks` and `ds.chunks` properties inconsistent? 1020282789 | |
938186104 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/5843#issuecomment-938186104 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/5843 | IC_kwDOAMm_X84365V4 | TomNicholas 35968931 | 2021-10-07T22:00:55Z | 2021-10-07T22:00:55Z | MEMBER |
There is another difference between |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Why are `da.chunks` and `ds.chunks` properties inconsistent? 1020282789 |
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 4