Skip to content
Robust, flexible and resource-efficient pipelines using Go and the commandline
Go Shell
Branch: master
Clone or download
Latest commit d4b82f9 Sep 7, 2019
Permalink
Type Name Latest commit message Commit time
Failed to load latest commit information.
.circleci Update CircleCI config to 2.0 syntax Jun 13, 2019
cmd/scipipe Make test in scipipe cmd timezone independent Jun 13, 2019
components assign the stream function a temporary file during the information pa… Sep 7, 2019
docs Update file_combinations.md May 21, 2019
examples Add Go code in README Mar 26, 2019
.gitignore More patterns in .gitignore Jul 23, 2015
.travis.yml Add comment about building only main folder in travis May 5, 2017
LICENSE Initial commit Mar 7, 2015
README.md Add citing info in README/docs May 20, 2019
appveyor.yml Fix Windows issues Jun 15, 2019
audit.go Change ordering of AuditInfo fields for better readability Jul 28, 2018
baseprocess.go Use temp dir instead of temp file ext, for atomizing, to simplify han… Jun 18, 2018
const.go Bump version to 0.9.6 Sep 7, 2019
ip.go Implement String() method on FileIP (use its path) May 20, 2019
ip_test.go Use temp dir instead of temp file ext, for atomizing, to simplify han… Jun 18, 2018
log.go Add tests (and fix bugs) for file_splitter, while refactoring atomize… Jun 26, 2018
misc_test.go Improve test organization (just helper stuff in misc_test.go) Jun 21, 2018
mkdocs.yml Add docs for the FileCombinator component May 21, 2019
port.go Add pp.FromFloat() method Jul 19, 2018
port_test.go Refactor: Rename SetPathCustom -> SetOutFunc Jul 19, 2018
process.go Hash SubStream IP Paths for TempDir Jun 20, 2019
process_test.go Add 'failing' test for #81. Jun 14, 2019
sink.go Change some remaining variable names after API change Jun 13, 2018
task.go fix small typo Sep 7, 2019
task_test.go Add test for AtomizeIP's extra file moving' Jun 19, 2019
testcov.sh Update CircleCI config to 2.0 syntax Jun 13, 2019
updatedocs.sh Fix quoting issue in updatedocs.sh script May 5, 2017
utils.go Change TempDir to use a hash of Task information for the directory name. Jun 14, 2019
utils_test.go Add more tests Jul 25, 2018
workflow.go Fix #77: Don't remove new driver proc from from main proc map while i… Jun 13, 2019
workflow_test.go Remove non-implemented test Jun 13, 2019

README.md

SciPipe

Robust, flexible and resource-efficient pipelines using Go and the commandline

Build Status Test Coverage Codebeat Grade Go Report Card GoDoc Gitter DOI

Project links: Documentation & Main Website | Issue Tracker | Chat

Why SciPipe?

  • Intuitive: SciPipe works by flowing data through a network of channels and processes
  • Flexible: Wrapped command-line programs can be combined with processes in Go
  • Convenient: Full control over how your files are named
  • Efficient: Workflows are compiled to binary code that run fast
  • Parallel: Pipeline paralellism between processes as well as task parallelism for multiple inputs, making efficient use of multiple CPU cores
  • Supports streaming: Stream data between programs to avoid wasting disk space
  • Easy to debug: Use available Go debugging tools or just println()
  • Portable: Distribute workflows as Go code or as self-contained executable files

Project updates

Introduction

SciPipe is a library for writing Scientific Workflows, sometimes also called "pipelines", in the Go programming language.

When you need to run many commandline programs that depend on each other in complex ways, SciPipe helps by making the process of running these programs flexible, robust and reproducible. SciPipe also lets you restart an interrupted run without over-writing already produced output and produces an audit report of what was run, among many other things.

SciPipe is built on the proven principles of Flow-Based Programming (FBP) to achieve maximum flexibility, productivity and agility when designing workflows. Compared to plain dataflow, FBP provides the benefits that processes are fully self-contained, so that a library of re-usable components can be created, and plugged into new workflows ad-hoc.

Similar to other FBP systems, SciPipe workflows can be likened to a network of assembly lines in a factory, where items (files) are flowing through a network of conveyor belts, stopping at different independently running stations (processes) for processing, as depicted in the picture above.

SciPipe was initially created for problems in bioinformatics and cheminformatics, but works equally well for any problem involving pipelines of commandline applications.

Project status: SciPipe is still alpha software and minor breaking API changes still happens as we try to streamline the process of writing workflows. Please follow the commit history closely for any API updates if you have code already written in SciPipe (Let us know if you need any help in migrating code to the latest API).

Known limitations

Hello World example

Let's look at an example workflow to get a feel for what writing workflows in SciPipe looks like:

package main

import (
    // Import SciPipe, aliased to sp
    sp "github.com/scipipe/scipipe"
)

func main() {
    // Init workflow and max concurrent tasks
    wf := sp.NewWorkflow("hello_world", 4)

    // Initialize processes, and file extensions
    hello := wf.NewProc("hello", "echo 'Hello ' > {o:out|.txt}")
    world := wf.NewProc("world", "echo $(cat {i:in}) World > {o:out|.txt}")

    // Define data flow
    world.In("in").From(hello.Out("out"))

    // Run workflow
    wf.Run()
}

Running the example

Let's put the code in a file named scipipe_helloworld.go and run it:

$ go run minimal.go
AUDIT   2018/07/17 21:42:26 | workflow:hello_world             | Starting workflow (Writing log to log/scipipe-20180717-214226-hello_world.log)
AUDIT   2018/07/17 21:42:26 | hello                            | Executing: echo 'Hello ' > hello.out.txt
AUDIT   2018/07/17 21:42:26 | hello                            | Finished: echo 'Hello ' > hello.out.txt
AUDIT   2018/07/17 21:42:26 | world                            | Executing: echo $(cat ../hello.out.txt) World > hello.out.txt.world.out.txt
AUDIT   2018/07/17 21:42:26 | world                            | Finished: echo $(cat ../hello.out.txt) World > hello.out.txt.world.out.txt
AUDIT   2018/07/17 21:42:26 | workflow:hello_world             | Finished workflow (Log written to log/scipipe-20180717-214226-hello_world.log)

Let's check what file SciPipe has generated:

$ ls -1 hello*
hello.out.txt
hello.out.txt.audit.json
hello.out.txt.world.out.txt
hello.out.txt.world.out.txt.audit.json

As you can see, it has created a file hello.out.txt, and hello.out.world.out.txt, and an accompanying .audit.json for each of these files.

Now, let's check the output of the final resulting file:

$ cat hello.out.txt.world.out.txt
Hello World

Now we can rejoice that it contains the text "Hello World", exactly as a proper Hello World example should :)

Now, these were a little long and cumbersome filenames, weren't they? SciPipe gives you very good control over how to name your files, if you don't want to rely on the automatic file naming. For example, we could set the first filename to a static one, and then use the first name as a basis for the file name for the second process, like so:

package main

import (
    // Import the SciPipe package, aliased to 'sp'
    sp "github.com/scipipe/scipipe"
)

func main() {
    // Init workflow with a name, and max concurrent tasks
    wf := sp.NewWorkflow("hello_world", 4)

    // Initialize processes and set output file paths
    hello := wf.NewProc("hello", "echo 'Hello ' > {o:out}")
    hello.SetOut("out", "hello.txt")

    world := wf.NewProc("world", "echo $(cat {i:in}) World >> {o:out}")
    // The modifier 's/.txt//' will replace '.txt' in the input path with ''
    world.SetOut("out", "{i:in|s/.txt//}_world.txt")

    // Connect network
    world.In("in").From(hello.Out("out"))

    // Run workflow
    wf.Run()
}

Now, if we run this, the file names get a little cleaner:

$ ls -1 hello*
hello.txt
hello.txt.audit.json
hello.txt.world.go
hello.txt.world.txt
hello.txt.world.txt.audit.json

The audit logs

Finally, we could have a look at one of those audit file created:

$ cat hello.txt.world.txt.audit.json
{
    "ID": "99i5vxhtd41pmaewc8pr",
    "ProcessName": "world",
    "Command": "echo $(cat hello.txt) World \u003e\u003e hello.txt.world.txt.tmp/hello.txt.world.txt",
    "Params": {},
    "Tags": {},
    "StartTime": "2018-06-15T19:10:37.955602979+02:00",
    "FinishTime": "2018-06-15T19:10:37.959410102+02:00",
    "ExecTimeNS": 3000000,
    "Upstream": {
        "hello.txt": {
            "ID": "w4oeiii9h5j7sckq7aqq",
            "ProcessName": "hello",
            "Command": "echo 'Hello ' \u003e hello.txt.tmp/hello.txt",
            "Params": {},
            "Tags": {},
            "StartTime": "2018-06-15T19:10:37.950032676+02:00",
            "FinishTime": "2018-06-15T19:10:37.95468214+02:00",
            "ExecTimeNS": 4000000,
            "Upstream": {}
        }
    }

Each such audit-file contains a hierarchic JSON-representation of the full workflow path that was executed in order to produce this file. On the first level is the command that directly produced the corresponding file, and then, indexed by their filenames, under "Upstream", there is a similar chunk describing how all of its input files were generated. This process will be repeated in a recursive way for large workflows, so that, for each file generated by the workflow, there is always a full, hierarchic, history of all the commands run - with their associated metadata - to produce that file.

You can find many more examples in the examples folder in the GitHub repo.

For more information about how to write workflows using SciPipe, and much more, see SciPipe website (scipipe.org)!

More material on SciPipe

Citing SciPipe

If you use SciPipe in academic or scholarly work, please cite the following paper as source:

Lampa S, Dahlö M, Alvarsson J, Spjuth O. SciPipe: A workflow library for agile development of complex and dynamic bioinformatics pipelines Gigascience. 8, 5 (2019). DOI: 10.1093/gigascience/giz044

Acknowledgements

Related tools

Find below a few tools that are more or less similar to SciPipe that are worth worth checking out before deciding on what tool fits you best (in approximate order of similarity to SciPipe):

You can’t perform that action at this time.