issue_comments

Table actions

5 rows where issue = 231811609 sorted by updated_at descending

✖
✖

✎ View and edit SQL

This data as json, CSV (advanced)

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

user 2

issue 1

  • Orthogonal indexing and MemoryCachedArray · 5 ✖

author_association 1

id html_url issue_url node_id user created_at updated_at ▲ author_association body reactions performed_via_github_app issue
340649777 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/1429#issuecomment-340649777 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/1429 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDM0MDY0OTc3Nw== fujiisoup 6815844 2017-10-31T03:29:54Z 2017-10-31T03:29:54Z MEMBER

Thanks, @shoyer.

These array wrappers should not store a bare np.array but current code is error-prone. I will send a fix.

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   Orthogonal indexing and MemoryCachedArray 231811609
340478707 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/1429#issuecomment-340478707 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/1429 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDM0MDQ3ODcwNw== shoyer 1217238 2017-10-30T15:22:46Z 2017-10-30T15:22:46Z MEMBER

I don't think I understand how MemoryCachedArray is being used in xarray. What object would be stored in this array wrapper?

When not using dask and cache=True in open_dataset, we use it to wrap arrays loaded from netCDF files.

Currently, it looks like the object loaded into it is usually a CopyOnWriteArray, which we use to ensure that modifying an xarray object never modifies the file on disk: ``` In [24]: ds2 = xr.open_dataset('foo.nc', engine='netcdf4')

In [25]: ds2.x.variable._data Out[25]: MemoryCachedArray(array=CopyOnWriteArray(array=LazilyIndexedArray(array=<xarray.backends.netCDF4_.NetCDF4ArrayWrapper object at 0x11b3f25c0>, key=OuterIndexer(slice(None, None, None),)))) ```

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   Orthogonal indexing and MemoryCachedArray 231811609
340465260 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/1429#issuecomment-340465260 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/1429 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDM0MDQ2NTI2MA== fujiisoup 6815844 2017-10-30T14:42:38Z 2017-10-30T14:42:38Z MEMBER

I noticed that PR #1639 does not fully support indexing for MemoryCachedArray.

I don't think I understand how MemoryCachedArray is being used in xarray. What object would be stored in this array wrapper?

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   Orthogonal indexing and MemoryCachedArray 231811609
304924644 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/1429#issuecomment-304924644 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/1429 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDMwNDkyNDY0NA== shoyer 1217238 2017-05-30T15:57:19Z 2017-05-30T15:57:19Z MEMBER

I thought this would be fixed https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/1433, but this is actually a different issue.

We need to wrap the indexing result here for orthogonal indexing, but that probably shouldn't happen in the MemoryCachedArray layer. For SciPy, this happens inside ScipyArrayWrapper.__getitem__. For NumPy, this currently happens inside indexing.orthogonally_indexable.

Right now, xarray assumes that unknown array type that makes it into Variable._data supports orthogonal indexing. This is probably a mistake: we really should be more explicit and make fewer assumptions, perhaps by explicitly listing allowed array types or adding a registration system.

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   Orthogonal indexing and MemoryCachedArray 231811609
304481867 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/1429#issuecomment-304481867 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/1429 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDMwNDQ4MTg2Nw== shoyer 1217238 2017-05-27T23:23:56Z 2017-05-27T23:23:56Z MEMBER

I think I have a fix for this on my laptop -- I'll push it to GitHub tonight or tomorrow

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   Orthogonal indexing and MemoryCachedArray 231811609

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]);