Due to the current gap in continued funding from the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF), the NSF Unidata Program Center has temporarily paused most operations. See NSF Unidata Pause in Most Operations for details.
On 9/7/2012 8:01 AM, Ellyn Montgomery wrote:
for example, i changed to: S_40(0:105483:1000, 0:0:1, 0:0:1, 0:0:1)How did you modify S_40 to limit the display? In the above, my only option is to click NCdump, and everything gets listed in the little NCdump box.
You directly edit the string "S_40(0:105483:1000, 0:0:1, 0:0:1, 0:0:1)" in the combo box.
http://geoport.whoi.edu/thredds/dodsC/MBAY_LT/7551mc-a1h.nc is missing the variable T_20. If you put the ncl file in the "Aggregation" tab, then hit the "check files" buttom on upper right, you get a report (see below). there are enough problems to suggest that this collection of files is not suitable for a "joinExisting" aggregation, which requires (almost) exact files except or the aggregation coordinate.I think what you said is that although the aggregation I'm attempting doesn't crash and burn, it's really failing because the files in the joinExisting don't have the same content (variables). Best practice should be to do "check files" first and ensure there aren't a lot of errors about missing variables. In theory then, if I removed the files with missing temperature, and only aggregated on T_20 (leaving out all the other variables that may or may not be present) it would work?
i think so
So if I want to aggregate temperature from files with variables called T_20, T_24, T_28 (all with standard_name = sea_water_temperature), I'd need to rename the variables in ncml, put that new catalog in TDS, then aggregate from the new spot?
yes
Or is doing a 2-part aggregation a better approach? step 1 might be aggregating the three names for temperature separately (one for T_20,. one for T_24, and one for T_28), renaming the output variable to the CF name each time, then aggregate the 3 files to get one long temperature record?
i wouldnt do a nested aggregation unless its really needed
also: 1) the extra lat,lon dimension on the variables is actually incorrect. however it "works" because its equal to 1,1.We're in the process of re-doing the ncml to represent the data as discrete samples, and the extra lat and lon dimensions will be removed there. We kept our data as "grid" representation because in earlier CF versions I couldn't get PointFeatures to handle the multiple depths in adcp data correctly.2) if you are running a TDS server >= 4.2, enabling the cdmremote service and using it for remote aggregations like this will speed up response time.We'll try this. Thanks again for the help!
you're welcome! John
netcdf-java
archives: