issues: 267354113

This data as json

id node_id number title user state locked assignee milestone comments created_at updated_at closed_at author_association active_lock_reason draft pull_request body reactions performed_via_github_app state_reason repo type
267354113 MDU6SXNzdWUyNjczNTQxMTM= 1644 Formalize contract between XArray and the dask.distributed scheduler 2443309 closed 0     1 2017-10-21T06:09:22Z 2017-11-14T23:40:06Z 2017-11-14T23:40:06Z MEMBER      

From @mrocklin in https://github.com/pangeo-data/pangeo/issues/5#issue-255329911:

XArray was designed long before the dask.distributed task scheduler. As a result newer ways of doing things, like asynchronous computing, persist, etc. either don't function well, or were hacked on in a less-than-optimal-way. We should improve this relationship so that XArray can take advantage of newer dask.distributed features today and also adhere to contracts so that it benefits from changes in the future.

There is conversation towards the end of dask/dask#1068 about what such a contract might look like. I think that @jcrist is planning to work on this on the Dask side some time in the next week or two.

There is a new "Dask Collection Interface" implemented in https://github.com/dask/dask/pull/2748 (and the dask docs docs).

I'm creating this issue here (in addition to https://github.com/pangeo-data/pangeo/issues/5) to track design considerations on the xarray side and to get input from the @pydata/xarray team.

cc @mrocklin, @shoyer, @jcrist, @rabernat 

{
    "url": "https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/1644/reactions",
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   completed 13221727 issue

Links from other tables