On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 9:00 AM, John Graybeal <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 Martin. I am bugged (not the technical term) by the conclusions here, > which seem to be: Because people design systems badly, I must constrain my > own system to accommodate their failures. > > The use cases for storing the summary information with the file are: (A) It's > faster to access, which in some circumstances affect a user (or the cost of > computer cycles), whether due to large files or lots of files. (B) In some > circumstance (I don't have a netCDF file mangler app sitting in hand), it's > the only reasonable way to access.
Would it make sense to have a standard (but general) way to mark a given piece of data as "computed from the data set" So aggregators, subsetters, etc, would know which data was fragile in that manner? (and hopefully could re-compute it, or at least remove it) -Chris -- Christopher Barker, Ph.D. Oceanographer Emergency Response Division NOAA/NOS/OR&R (206) 526-6959 voice 7600 Sand Point Way NE (206) 526-6329 fax Seattle, WA 98115 (206) 526-6317 main reception [email protected] _______________________________________________ CF-metadata mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
