Skip to content
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

Feature #2880 SeriesAnalysis allow time templates in field name #2881

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jan 31, 2025

Conversation

georgemccabe
Copy link
Collaborator

@georgemccabe georgemccabe commented Jan 30, 2025

This PR also removes support for SERIES_ANALYSIS_RUNTIME_FREQ = RUN_ONCE_FOR_EACH. Configuring the tool this way will not produce useful results, as series_analysis needs to process a series of data.

Pull Request Testing

  • Describe testing already performed for these changes:

Ran use case from discussion #2876 and confirmed that fix resulted in a successful run.

  • Recommend testing for the reviewer(s) to perform, including the location of input datasets, and any additional instructions:

Check that this change allows the SFS use case that required a workaround to run without the workaround

  • Do these changes include sufficient documentation updates, ensuring that no errors or warnings exist in the build of the documentation? [Yes]

  • Do these changes include sufficient testing updates? [Yes]

  • Will this PR result in changes to the test suite? [No]

    If yes, describe the new output and/or changes to the existing output:

  • Do these changes introduce new SonarQube findings? [No]

    If yes, please describe:

  • Please complete this pull request review by 2/4/2025.

Pull Request Checklist

See the METplus Workflow for details.

  • Add any new Python packages to the METplus Components Python Requirements table.
  • For any new datasets, an entry to the METplus Verification Datasets Guide.
  • Review the source issue metadata (required labels, projects, and milestone).
  • Complete the PR definition above.
  • Ensure the PR title matches the feature or bugfix branch name.
  • Define the PR metadata, as permissions allow.
    Select: Reviewer(s) and Development issue
    Select: Milestone as the version that will include these changes
    Select: Coordinated METplus-X.Y Support project for bugfix releases or METplus-Wrappers-X.Y.Z Development project for official releases
  • After submitting the PR, select the ⚙️ icon in the Development section of the right hand sidebar. Search for the issue that this PR will close and select it, if it is not already selected.
  • After the PR is approved, merge your changes. If permissions do not allow this, request that the reviewer do the merge.
  • Close the linked issue and delete your feature or bugfix branch from GitHub.

…/obs name -- previously it was only supported in the level value
…UN_ONCE_FOR_EACH because this will not produce any useful output. The default setting of RUN_ONCE_PER_INIT_OR_VALID will be used instead
@georgemccabe georgemccabe requested a review from CPKalb January 30, 2025 15:04
@georgemccabe georgemccabe added this to the METplus-6.1.0 milestone Jan 30, 2025
@georgemccabe georgemccabe linked an issue Jan 30, 2025 that may be closed by this pull request
24 tasks
Copy link
Contributor

@CPKalb CPKalb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Tested this both on the data from Issue 2876 and also using the data for the SFS use case (which uses time templates as input to python embedding for Series Analysis). Both worked as expected.

@georgemccabe georgemccabe merged commit 3341c11 into develop Jan 31, 2025
76 checks passed
@georgemccabe georgemccabe deleted the feature_2880_sa_time_in_field_name branch January 31, 2025 19:21
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Status: 🏁 Done
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Enhancement: Support time templates in field name for SeriesAnalysis
2 participants