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

Data with resets (legal nonmonotonic timestamps) incorrect rendering #70

Open
1 task
breznak opened this issue Jan 12, 2016 · 7 comments · Fixed by #69
Open
1 task

Data with resets (legal nonmonotonic timestamps) incorrect rendering #70

breznak opened this issue Jan 12, 2016 · 7 comments · Fixed by #69

Comments

@breznak
Copy link
Member

breznak commented Jan 12, 2016

Problem:
For example OPF files have a reset field which annotates a new sequence starts. It is perfectly legal for the new sequence to have a different/older timestamp than the previous sequence. This is detected as non-monotonicity in time and causes the graph to be incorrectly rendered.

Solution:

  • if detected combination hasResets, the timestamp is ignored and we use iterations.
    • it would be nice to show the "original time" field, currently it gets suppressed.

Note:

  • I'm thinking if we should avoid the hassle with timestamp parsing at all, and just stick with iteration for xdata and show timestamp as a normal field; as suggested above.
@breznak
Copy link
Member Author

breznak commented Jan 12, 2016

Thoughts @jefffohl @rhyolight ?

@rhyolight
Copy link
Contributor

@breznak said:

It is perfectly legal for the new sequence to have a different/older timestamp than the previous sequence.

@scottpurdy Is this true?

@scottpurdy
Copy link

What code are we talking about here? In the OPF, it is perfectly valid to have resets and older timestamps afterward. But what graph are we talking about?

@breznak
Copy link
Member Author

breznak commented Jan 12, 2016

@scottpurdy just visualization specific problem here. For DyGraphs we need functions (one fn value at given time), OPF with resets does not ensure that, so we should represent the data differently, not plotted as function of time, but as fn of iteration number(step).

@scottpurdy
Copy link

Ahh got it. Yes that sounds right. We should use the record number for the x-axis and timestamps just as labels.

@rhyolight
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks @scottpurdy

@breznak
Copy link
Member Author

breznak commented Jan 12, 2016

Reopening for discussion if we should :

  • ditch the timestamp and use iterations for x-data
  • keep using time where possible (current)

@breznak breznak reopened this Jan 12, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants