issue_comments

Table actions

7 rows where issue = 991857313 sorted by updated_at descending

✎ View and edit SQL

This data as json, CSV (advanced)

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

user 4

author_association 3

issue 1

  • rio.crs seems to misbehave with geopandas.to_crs · 7 ✖
id html_url issue_url node_id user created_at updated_at ▲ author_association body reactions performed_via_github_app issue
924395904 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/5782#issuecomment-924395904 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/5782 IC_kwDOAMm_X843GSmA snowman2 8699967 2021-09-21T21:24:03Z 2021-09-21T21:24:12Z CONTRIBUTOR

xr.open_rasterio() is being used earlier in the pipeline

What issues do you have if you change to use rioxarray.open_rasterio?

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   rio.crs seems to misbehave with geopandas.to_crs 991857313
924395141 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/5782#issuecomment-924395141 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/5782 IC_kwDOAMm_X843GSaF snowman2 8699967 2021-09-21T21:23:01Z 2021-09-21T21:23:01Z CONTRIBUTOR

This appears to not be an xarray issue since the code uses open_dataset and the rio.crs accessor. The rio.crs accessor is from rioxarray. From what I can tell, the issue has to do with the data is stored in the netCDF file: https://corteva.github.io/rioxarray/stable/getting_started/crs_management.html

My guess is that there is an attribute named crs with the contents +init=EPSG:XXXX. If that is the case, I recommend using rioxarray to do:

python data.rio.write_crs("ESPG:XXXX", inplace=True)

Hopefully this is helpful.

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   rio.crs seems to misbehave with geopandas.to_crs 991857313
916060645 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/5782#issuecomment-916060645 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/5782 IC_kwDOAMm_X842mfnl dimzog 16776790 2021-09-09T12:48:43Z 2021-09-09T12:48:43Z NONE

@dcherian adopting rioxarray breaks the code. It would be better off "fixing" crs in xarray. 

{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   rio.crs seems to misbehave with geopandas.to_crs 991857313
916050221 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/5782#issuecomment-916050221 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/5782 IC_kwDOAMm_X842mdEt dcherian 2448579 2021-09-09T12:33:19Z 2021-09-09T12:33:31Z MEMBER

Thanks for following up @dimzog

Can you try using rioxarray instead of xr.open_rasterio

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   rio.crs seems to misbehave with geopandas.to_crs 991857313
916025248 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/5782#issuecomment-916025248 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/5782 IC_kwDOAMm_X842mW-g dimzog 16776790 2021-09-09T12:02:11Z 2021-09-09T12:32:28Z NONE

xr.open_rasterio() is being used earlier in the pipeline, i think traced back the issue in these lines of code https://github.com/pydata/xarray/blob/7bfee3eaa8fd731494cf6b406d6abb4bec061001/xarray/backends/rasterio_.py#L335-L342

There was a discussion in geopandas repo here https://github.com/geopandas/geopandas/issues/2104

@jhamman @dcherian 

{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   rio.crs seems to misbehave with geopandas.to_crs 991857313
915812698 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/5782#issuecomment-915812698 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/5782 IC_kwDOAMm_X842ljFa dimzog 16776790 2021-09-09T06:51:28Z 2021-09-09T06:51:28Z NONE

@jhamman I'll be posting this in geopandas repo, thank you!

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   rio.crs seems to misbehave with geopandas.to_crs 991857313
915810862 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/5782#issuecomment-915810862 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/5782 IC_kwDOAMm_X842liou jhamman 2443309 2021-09-09T06:47:46Z 2021-09-09T06:47:46Z MEMBER

Hi @dimzog. Thank you for taking time to report this issue. However, it seems to me that this would be better reported on the geopandas and/or rioxarray issue tracker. 

{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   rio.crs seems to misbehave with geopandas.to_crs 991857313

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]);