Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Refactoring JRA55 #182

Open
simone-silvestri opened this issue Sep 18, 2024 · 3 comments · May be fixed by #286
Open

Refactoring JRA55 #182

simone-silvestri opened this issue Sep 18, 2024 · 3 comments · May be fixed by #286

Comments

@simone-silvestri
Copy link
Collaborator

simone-silvestri commented Sep 18, 2024

The JRA55 requires a refactor because it assumes that all the data for a variable is contained in one file.
This is true for only for repeat year forcing; in reality, multi-year forcing is contained in different files.
This requires us to restructure

  1. the downloading procedure
  2. the JRA55NetCDFbackend
  3. the setting of the data in memory

We also need a design that allows us to possibly add different versions efficiently. I propose to generalize ECCOMetadata to a general Metadata type and structure the JRA55 data handling in the same way we do ECCO at the moment and provide a JRA55RepeatYear and a JRA55MultiYear version.

@glwagner

@glwagner
Copy link
Member

Don't we want a different backend for repeat year vs multi year forcing?

So we don't need to refactor, we just need to create a new backend + change the name of the existing?

@glwagner
Copy link
Member

But having a single "metadata" abstraction for all data is more ambitious. It does seem possible. Less sure about the backend. I think each data could be idiosyntratic, motivating different backends for different datatypes.

@glwagner
Copy link
Member

If you sketch your idea here we can have a more concrete discussion

@simone-silvestri simone-silvestri linked a pull request Dec 5, 2024 that will close this issue
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants