Oscar, > I found a poor man's solution that seems to work: > > I don't know the exact dimension of the nc-file beforehand, but I can > make a reasonable estimate of the maximum possible length of the file > and I add some 10% to that just to be sure. Using now a dimension that > is always a bit larger than the maximum record-length, I get nc-files > with the same file-size as with exact-dimension information. The trade > off, is that the processing time is a bit longer, but I much prefer that > my files are half the size! > > Any objections to this procedure? That seems like a fine and practical solution. > regards,.............................Oscar > > > PS I just received your mail comparing file-sizes for different > netcdf-versions. Netcdf-4 is not very efficient in terms of disk usage! It can be very efficient when using compression, which is not available with the netCDF-3 classic format. For example, some of the CMIP5 3D ocean model fields are reduced by more than 50% in size when stored in netCDF-4 with compression. --Russ Russ Rew UCAR Unidata Program address@hidden http://www.unidata.ucar.edu Ticket Details =================== Ticket ID: AMR-714212 Department: Support netCDF Priority: Normal Status: Closed
NOTE: All email exchanges with Unidata User Support are recorded in the Unidata inquiry tracking system and then made publicly available through the web. If you do not want to have your interactions made available in this way, you must let us know in each email you send to us.