On Nov 24, 2012, at 9:38 PM, dashesy <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 8:22 PM, Quincey Koziol <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> On Nov 24, 2012, at 8:59 PM, dashesy <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 6:33 PM, Quincey Koziol <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Hi Nils,
>>>>
>>>> On Nov 22, 2012, at 1:39 AM, ceratos <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Maybe for clarification:
>>>>> What I really want is to save the frames (one group with different images
>>>>> and metadata) continuously in one hdf5.
>>>>> At the beginning I create only one file without a frame. Continuously the
>>>>> frames arrive and I want to append them to the file.
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe there are other structures or strategy in HDF to store this?
>>>>
>>>> You could create a 3-D chunked dataset with an unlimited dimension
>>>> and store each frame as a new "slice" in the Z direction.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Just curious, is this faster than packet table?
>>
>> Well, packet tables are designed for 1-D data, so it's a bit of an
>> apples-to-oranges comparison...
>
> But I am using it for vector data of fixed length, data type can be
> anything, like a 2D array representing an image.
> Again this is a matter of choice, but I am more curious to know which
> one is better for realtime tasks (requires less IO for example)
In that case, I would expect the packet tables to perform similarly to
what I described. (They are just a wrapper around the functionality in the
library that implements what I described)
Quincey
_______________________________________________
Hdf-forum is for HDF software users discussion.
[email protected]
http://mail.hdfgroup.org/mailman/listinfo/hdf-forum_hdfgroup.org
