-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 141
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
xarray container type #54
Comments
+1 for adding, and, as you said in other places, +7 for keeping the set of containers flexible and the number of places in the code checking specific containers to a minimum. |
yeah, for adding a new container, the main decision points are:
|
Thanks for the info @seibert ! As for Dask data structures, xarray supports the Dask interface, therefore |
@mmccarty , I think Stan's point was the opposite - what should we do in the default non-dask case, exactly? I think it's OK to use dask internally anyway (i.e., chunking, in this context), but that's an opinion, not authoritative. |
Well, it is both directions. For the other containers, there is a clear distinction between in-memory and out-of-core/distributed data structure:
|
:) |
^ yes, that's what I was getting at. |
Ok, that makes sense. |
Following intake/intake-xarray#1 (comment) , I regard this as solved.
|
Issue 43 lists candidate additions to the container types supported by intake. At least one project will need xarray in the near term. This issue tracks the work to add an xarray container type.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: