issue_comments

Table actions

2 rows where issue = 233992696 and user = 1217238 sorted by updated_at descending

✎ View and edit SQL

This data as json, CSV (advanced)

These facets timed out: issue

user 1

  • shoyer · 2 ✖

author_association 1

id html_url issue_url node_id user created_at updated_at ▲ author_association body reactions performed_via_github_app issue
306834764 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/1444#issuecomment-306834764 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/1444 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDMwNjgzNDc2NA== shoyer 1217238 2017-06-07T15:39:55Z 2017-06-07T15:39:55Z MEMBER

HDF5 doesn't come without its own draw backs...such as vastly more complicated (and admittedly more capable) on-disk format.

Yes, of course. But I thought netCDF4-extended meant NetCDF on HDF5, making use of all the HD5 features. So I didn't think that was the tradeoff here.

Also, while unsigned types are a feature of the netCDF4/HDF5, strictly speaking, the netCDF4 unsigned types are not compatible with any released version of the CF specification

Sure, though if you're strictly following CF, you probably would use valid_min/valid_max/valid_range instead of _Unsigned...

Anyways, again I don't really have an objection here. This attribute can be interpreted in a pretty unambiguous way, so adding support for this would be mostly harmless.

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   Best practice when the _Unsigned attribute is present in NetCDF files 233992696
306712888 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/1444#issuecomment-306712888 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/1444 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDMwNjcxMjg4OA== shoyer 1217238 2017-06-07T07:34:05Z 2017-06-07T07:34:05Z MEMBER

To clarify: I didn't want to let NetCDF4-python parse this attribute, because it would break an invariant in our data model. I'm not opposed to supporting this separately in xarray (using xarray's machinery for handling netcdf conventions).

I will say though that this convention makes little sense to me for netcdf4/hdf5 files, which already provide native support for unsigned types, so separately I would also encourage this data provider to change their practices here :).

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   Best practice when the _Unsigned attribute is present in NetCDF files 233992696

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]);