-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 199
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
Another Error: too may BAM features... question #1524
Comments
Editing the chunkSizeLimit in the "Edit config" panel inside jbrowse does not work (xref #895) but you can edit the trackList.json for the track or, on initial track import with the Open track dialog there is a config editor there also if you are not in control of the trackList.json |
Also it is interesting that a small BAM file results in very large chunk sizes like this. I had another user report stuff like this but from what I could tell even tools like samtools were requesting the same large amount of data. It is kind of an annoying situation and it's possible we should just get rid of chunkSizeLimit |
Thanks @cmdcolin I will try your recommendation with |
I agree this is not ideal at all. If you are interested in helping we could try to fix. We'd need to find out why it's doing this. If you have a sample test file please let me know. I may have a similar test file in my email from another user I can check if not. Furthermore, CRAM has better behavior for this I believe not just because it is more compressed but because the index format is different. If you can please consider using CRAM, jbrowse has supported it for awhile. |
We agree with you |
I think we resolved this. It is an interesting issue and is fundamentally difficult to handle due to how BAI index operates One takeaway was, a custom CSI index can improve performance samtools index -c -m 6 yourfile.bam Since BAI has minimum binSize ~16kb many reads can end up in a single bin, so for small genomes this can result in very large bin sizes (the CSI above has min bin size 64 bases, so much smaller) Using CRAM is also a good alternative Continued improvements in BAM performance would improve this situation even with the large BAI bins, and we might want to get rid of chunkSizeLimit also because it is generally just unwanted behavior from the user perspective |
Thanks @cmdcolin |
maybe can close for now with the workarounds reported |
On release 16.7 not try others yet I got this error:
I read the FAQ
I tried to view a little region 394 bases but I still got the error.
In fact The message is always display with any region size.
I try to add into a configuration track:
but I still have the error
So, how to fix it ?
The bam file is small 238Mo
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: