[AMDA] Uses CDF_ISTP as default

[jeandet]

No description provided.

[jeandet]

@brenard-irap the CI issue looks legit, with CDF output format it looks like I get a single column name for a 2 columns variable:

In [1]: from speasy import amda

In [2]: first_param_index=amda.list_parameters()[0]

In [3]: print(first_param_index)
<ParameterIndex: He flux>

In [4]: first_param=amda.get_parameter(first_param_index, "2018-01-01", "2018-01-02T01")

In [5]: first_param
Out[5]: <speasy.products.variable.SpeasyVariable at 0x7f894d4698c0>

In [6]: first_param.columns
Out[6]: ['He flux']

In [7]: first_param.values
Out[7]: 
array([[0.12428   , 0.        ],
...

Looks like an issue on ADMA side?

[brenard-irap]

For a spectrogram, we don't need to define a label for each data component...

I think you have the same problem with this CDAWeb parameter

>>> import speasy as spz
>>> mms1_dis_energyspectr_omni_fast = spz.get_data(
...     spz.inventories.tree.cda.MMS.MMS1.DIS.MMS1_FPI_FAST_L2_DIS_MOMS.mms1_dis_energyspectr_omni_fast, "2019-01-02T15:30",
...     "2019-01-02T20")
>>> mms1_dis_energyspectr_omni_fast.columns
['DEF_omni']
>>> mms1_dis_energyspectr_omni_fast.values
array([[  88873.6015625 ,   52076.25390625,   67580.1484375 , ...,
         952113.375     , 1113830.75      , 1006203.8125    ],
       [  67058.828125  ,   34980.6015625 ,   45100.02734375, ...,
         971669.5625    , 1124289.375     , 1000310.0625    ],
       [  65529.484375  ,   54712.4765625 ,   49212.6015625 , ...,
         976081.75      , 1111816.125     , 1066082.375     ],
       ...,
       [  24619.7265625 ,       0.        ,       0.        , ...,
         478687.3125    ,  199476.578125  ,  101960.5078125 ],
       [      0.        ,       0.        ,    1759.7244873 , ...,
         523574.90625   ,  278838.625     ,   79713.8203125 ],
       [      0.        ,       0.        ,   14445.49511719, ...,
         410759.90625   ,  193136.21875   ,   81875.1953125 ]])

[jeandet]

@brenard-irap my bad I overlooked, since there was only two columns I thought that is was a simple timeserie.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (476008b) 86.50% compared to head (8bc4b4f) 86.43%.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #101      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   86.50%   86.43%   -0.07%     
==========================================
  Files          51       51              
  Lines        3045     3045              
  Branches      490      490              
==========================================
- Hits         2634     2632       -2     
- Misses        275      276       +1     
- Partials      136      137       +1     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	85.77% <ø> (-0.69%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files	Coverage Δ
speasy/config/__init__.py	95.58% <ø> (ø)

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.