Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 20 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.
EPIC GWAS IMPORT ERROR #50
Conversation
May 30, 2012
added some commits
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
paddie
May 31, 2012
Contributor
example url with an example of a study with multiple identified GWAS relations <localhost>/study/19010793
remember to purge() and populate() first
example url with an example of a study with multiple identified GWAS relations remember to purge() and populate() first |
ghost
assigned
wejendorp and
jensraaby
May 31, 2012
May 31, 2012
and others
added some commits
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
wejendorp
Jun 1, 2012
Contributor
Now the Study documents have a list of names of diseases (csv), and are fully searchable again.
Now the Study documents have a list of names of diseases (csv), and are fully searchable again. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
jensraaby
Jun 1, 2012
Contributor
Are we ready to close this one yet? Thinking we should be moving this off the production line so we can start on to the pagination story
Are we ready to close this one yet? Thinking we should be moving this off the production line so we can start on to the pagination story |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
paddie
Jun 1, 2012
Contributor
Agreed, just want to be sure Jacob understands what happens to the indexer
Hilsen
Patrick-Ranjit D. Madsen
Sent from my mobile. Please excuse any and all typos, errors,
formatting, lack of punctuation or short responses.
On 01/06/2012, at 20.20, jensraaby
reply@reply.github.com
wrote:
Are we ready to close this one yet? Thinking we should be moving this off the production line so we can start on to the pagination story
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#50 (comment)
Agreed, just want to be sure Jacob understands what happens to the indexer Hilsen Patrick-Ranjit D. Madsen Sent from my mobile. Please excuse any and all typos, errors, On 01/06/2012, at 20.20, jensraaby
|
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
Merge it! I have it under wraps ^^ |
paddie commentedMay 31, 2012
I've been having fevery dreams these last couple of weeks, and I suddenly realized why. The import used one idiotic assumption when loading the GWAS. That each study only references a single disease. This, in retrospect, is obviously not the case, given that multiple GWAS correlations could possibly be identified in a study.
This means that each study now has a list of diseases they reference, instead of just one, and each disease now has many more studies to reference (possibly).
In other words, there is actually a many-to-many relationship between disease and study, whereas the old model only had a one disease to many studies relation.
study.disease_ref
but an array of keysSince this fix obviously has implications on how we search for studies, I wanted to give @wejendorp a heads up. Since the "disease_trait" field is no longer there, replaced by an array of disease_keys (I could add an additional disease_names string-array if that would simplify things?), you can no longer index the disease-field of the study. For now I've simply commented out that field in your indexing, and I couldn't figure out how to add indexing for arrays.