issues
2 rows where user = 5472566 sorted by updated_at descending
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
Suggested facets: created_at (date), updated_at (date), closed_at (date)
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 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
754413100 | MDU6SXNzdWU3NTQ0MTMxMDA= | 4634 | Read of netCDF file fails with units attribute that is not of type string | ajwdewit 5472566 | open | 0 | 5 | 2020-12-01T13:52:45Z | 2020-12-01T19:29:36Z | NONE | When opening a netCDF file which has a variable that has a units attribute with a definition of integer 1, xarray fails to open the file: ``` ~/bin/miniconda3/envs/py37_crucial/lib/python3.8/site-packages/xarray/conventions.py in _update_bounds_attributes(variables) 379 for v in variables.values(): 380 attrs = v.attrs --> 381 has_date_units = "units" in attrs and "since" in attrs["units"] 382 if has_date_units and "bounds" in attrs: 383 if attrs["bounds"] in variables: TypeError: argument of type 'numpy.int64' is not iterable ``` This because line 381 will search for the word "since" in an integer type which fails. Of course assigning a integer as units attribute is not wise, but some people tend to assign integer 1 for variables which have no units. |
{ "url": "https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4634/reactions", "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
xarray 13221727 | issue | ||||||||
401337638 | MDU6SXNzdWU0MDEzMzc2Mzg= | 2694 | Alignment problems with f32/f64 coordinate variables | ajwdewit 5472566 | closed | 0 | 3 | 2019-01-21T12:45:17Z | 2019-08-15T15:14:49Z | 2019-08-15T15:14:49Z | NONE | Code sampleThe code below leads to an awkward result when combining two DataArrays. Despite the fact that both d1 and d2 are defined as (11,6) arrays, a multiplication results in a (3,2) array. ```python import xarray as xr import numpy as np d1 = np.full((11,6), 2., dtype=np.float64) d2 = np.full_like(d1, 5.0) lonf64 = np.arange(0,1.1,0.1, dtype=np.float64) latf64 = np.arange(0,0.6,0.1, dtype=np.float64) lonf32 = np.arange(0,1.1,0.1, dtype=np.float32) latf32 = np.arange(0,0.6,0.1, dtype=np.float32) d1 = xr.DataArray(d1, coords=[('lon', lonf64), ('lat', latf64)]) d2 = xr.DataArray(d2, coords=[('lon', lonf32), ('lat', latf32)]) In [21]: d1.shape Out[21]: (11, 6) In [22]: d2.shape Out[22]: (11, 6) In [20]: d1 * d2 Out[20]: <xarray.DataArray (lon: 3, lat: 2)> array([[10., 10.], [10., 10.], [10., 10.]]) Coordinates: * lon (lon) float64 0.0 0.5 1.0 * lat (lat) float64 0.0 0.5 ``` Problem descriptionThe origin of this behaviour is that xarray cannot match the coordinate variables because of differences in precision between float32/64. Although they look the same: ```python In [24]: d1.lat.data[1] Out[24]: 0.1 In [25]: d2.lat.data[1] Out[25]: 0.1 ``` They are not: ```python In [27]: "%25.20f" % d1.lat.data[1] Out[27]: ' 0.10000000000000000555' In [28]: "%25.20f" % d2.lat.data[1] Out[28]: ' 0.10000000149011611938' ``` Except for the coordinate values at 0.0, 0.5, 1.0 which can be both represented with full accuracy in f32 and f64: ```python In [30]: "%25.20f" % d1.lat.data[5] Out[30]: ' 0.50000000000000000000' In [31]: "%25.20f" % d2.lat.data[5] Out[31]: ' 0.50000000000000000000' ``` Therefore the result of the multiplication is a (3,2) array because only the coordinates that match between d1 and d2 are returned. A bit similar issue has already been raised in this issue where tolerance in alignment between coordinate variables was discussed. Expected OutputYou could argue that this behavior is the 'expected' output from this operation. However, from the "principle of least astonishment" I would argue that it would be better to either include a tolerance in matching coordinate variables, or to raise a TypeError indicating the incompatibility in the coordinate variables. The results above were obtained with xarray 0.11.0 and numpy 1.14.2, while this behaviour did not occur in xarray version 0.10.4 with the same numpy version. |
{ "url": "https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2694/reactions", "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
completed | xarray 13221727 | issue |
Advanced export
JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited, object
CREATE TABLE [issues] ( [id] INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, [node_id] TEXT, [number] INTEGER, [title] TEXT, [user] INTEGER REFERENCES [users]([id]), [state] TEXT, [locked] INTEGER, [assignee] INTEGER REFERENCES [users]([id]), [milestone] INTEGER REFERENCES [milestones]([id]), [comments] INTEGER, [created_at] TEXT, [updated_at] TEXT, [closed_at] TEXT, [author_association] TEXT, [active_lock_reason] TEXT, [draft] INTEGER, [pull_request] TEXT, [body] TEXT, [reactions] TEXT, [performed_via_github_app] TEXT, [state_reason] TEXT, [repo] INTEGER REFERENCES [repos]([id]), [type] TEXT ); CREATE INDEX [idx_issues_repo] ON [issues] ([repo]); CREATE INDEX [idx_issues_milestone] ON [issues] ([milestone]); CREATE INDEX [idx_issues_assignee] ON [issues] ([assignee]); CREATE INDEX [idx_issues_user] ON [issues] ([user]);