[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[LDM #OAO-873149]: Re: RPCCDS LDM Feedtype Enhancement
- To: Virginia.Galvin@xxxxxxxx
- Subject: [LDM #OAO-873149]: Re: RPCCDS LDM Feedtype Enhancement
- From: "Unidata LDM Support" <support-ldm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 10:26:24 -0600
- Delivered-to: support-ldm@unidata.ucar.edu by laraine.unidata.ucar.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id A356ACB18B; Fri, 28 Mar 2008 10:26:24 -0600 (MDT) id 92E56D5116; Fri, 28 Mar 2008 10:26:24 -0600 (MDT)
Gini,
> As far as I know our LDM distribution hosts for Radar3 wont be on the
> IDD but we are using EXP already for rtstats and we are concerned about
> long term development of radar3 distribution with no official feed
> classification. Is the use of the NIDS type data an option for us? It
> does seem to describe our data but seems that Weather Central has been
> using it for its own distributions.
If the data will still be the level-2 data from the radars
(even though it might be of higher resolution) then the
NEXRAD2 feedtype would be the most appropriate one to use.
Selection (or rejection) of the new data-products can then
be done by using appropriate regular expressions -- assuming
that the product-identifiers are sufficiently different
(for example, the identifiers for the new data could start
with "NEXRAD3" or "HIRES" or something equally unique).
Are the new identifiers clearly different?
Otherwise, you'll have to use a non-optimal feedtype because
there's just not that many feedtypes to go around. SPARE
is a possibility.
Sorry I can't be of more help. This problem of limited
feedtypes is one motivator for a replacement for the LDM
(on which I'm currently working).
Regards,
Steve Emmerson
Ticket Details
===================
Ticket ID: OAO-873149
Department: Support LDM
Priority: Normal
Status: On Hold
