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

Add 'metric' argument to Party.decluster() #100

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Jun 19, 2017
Merged

Conversation

cjhopp
Copy link
Member

@cjhopp cjhopp commented Jun 15, 2017

By default, Party.decluster() should now consider the average single-station correlation value. Raw correlation sum can be specified with the metric argument.

@cjhopp
Copy link
Member Author

cjhopp commented Jun 15, 2017

I think fails are timeouts due to LOOONNNGG subspace tests in time domain. AppVeyor builds passing and subspace tests much faster with eventual pull #92 so this is probably good to go?

@calum-chamberlain
Copy link
Member

calum-chamberlain commented Jun 15, 2017 via email

@cjhopp
Copy link
Member Author

cjhopp commented Jun 15, 2017

I was just waiting for a review. But I'll merge #92 if you're down.

@calum-chamberlain
Copy link
Member

calum-chamberlain commented Jun 15, 2017 via email

@cjhopp
Copy link
Member Author

cjhopp commented Jun 15, 2017

Hayzeus. I just googled, "What time is it in London?"

.....

Copy link
Member

@calum-chamberlain calum-chamberlain left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good to me, but can you add a simple test in to check both options for the metric argument.

@cjhopp
Copy link
Member Author

cjhopp commented Jun 15, 2017

Surely can! I'll add it at home while watching Peaky Blinders.

@cjhopp
Copy link
Member Author

cjhopp commented Jun 15, 2017

Aight, there's a shot at it. Not sure if that's an acceptable way to do it? Test are still a bit obscure to me.

@cjhopp
Copy link
Member Author

cjhopp commented Jun 16, 2017

A real potpourri of failures, but they seem to be ones we've seen before (i.e. weird numpy error for 3.5 on Linux and GeoNet client issues)

@calum-chamberlain
Copy link
Member

Travis looks good, but why the appveyor fail? Their mobile site crashes my phone with that long test log, any ideas?

@cjhopp
Copy link
Member Author

cjhopp commented Jun 16, 2017

================================== FAILURES ===================================
______________ [doctest] eqcorrscan.utils.archive_read.read_data ______________
044 
045     .. note:: A note on arc_types, if arc_type is day_vols, then this will         look for directories labelled in the IRIS DMC conventions of         Yyyyy/Rjjj.01/... where yyyy is the year and jjj is the julian day.         Data within these files directories should be stored as day-long,         single-channel files.  This is not implemented in the fasted way         possible to allow for a more general situation.  If you require more         speed you will need to re-write this.
046 
047     .. rubric:: Example
048 
049     >>> from eqcorrscan.utils.archive_read import read_data
050     >>> from obspy import UTCDateTime
051     >>> t1 = UTCDateTime(2012, 3, 26)
052     >>> stachans = [('FOZ', 'HHZ'), ('JCZ', 'HHZ')]
053     >>> st = read_data('GEONET', 'FDSN', t1, stachans)
UNEXPECTED EXCEPTION: ValueError(u'The current client does not have a station service.',)

@calum-chamberlain
Copy link
Member

calum-chamberlain commented Jun 17, 2017 via email

@cjhopp
Copy link
Member Author

cjhopp commented Jun 18, 2017

Still having permissions issues with AppVeyor. I can rerun builds for successful tests, but not for failed ones. I only see the 'Log' button for failed tests. Looking into it now.

@calum-chamberlain
Copy link
Member

That's annoying, I wonder if there is something I need to do.
Anyway, have restarted that build. Should green light, then go for it.

@cjhopp
Copy link
Member Author

cjhopp commented Jun 19, 2017

Okeedoke. Merging now.

With small changes like this, just a couple of missed lines means missing the codecov target. Am I understanding that right? I did add some additional coverage for test_party_decluster(), but not quite enough.

@cjhopp cjhopp merged commit f1e0a9a into develop Jun 19, 2017
@cjhopp cjhopp deleted the cjhopp-declust-patch branch June 19, 2017 21:14
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants