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

Fix scalar chunking #365

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
May 22, 2024
Merged

Fix scalar chunking #365

merged 4 commits into from
May 22, 2024

Conversation

dstansby
Copy link
Contributor

@dstansby dstansby commented Mar 25, 2024

Fixes #364. I noticed there wasn't a changelog, so I added one, I hope that's okay? I think it's important to communicate bug fixes like this.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 25, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 85.48%. Comparing base (1d113cd) to head (1927444).
Report is 41 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #365      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   85.42%   85.48%   +0.05%     
==========================================
  Files          13       13              
  Lines        1537     1536       -1     
==========================================
  Hits         1313     1313              
+ Misses        224      223       -1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@will-moore
Copy link
Member

Thanks for the contribution and the changelog.
Could you add a link from the changelog to this issue? In other repos do this (e.g. https://github.com/ome/omero-web/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md) which also allows you to be more concise in the changelog if you wish?

The change looks good and makes sense. The only question I have is whether anyone would consider this a breaking API change (and therefore require a major version bump) or if this is really just a bug fix? cc @joshmoore

@dstansby dstansby marked this pull request as ready for review March 29, 2024 10:27
Copy link
Member

@will-moore will-moore left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for the update. LGTM.

Previously, doing write_image(....storage_options={"chunks": 32}) would have resulted in chunks of e.g (sizeZ, sizeY, 32) but this feature wasn't documented or have tests and the behaviour was different from zarr-python.
So, I think we could consider a change in this behaviour to be a bug-fix rather than a breaking API change, but happy to hear other opinions @joshmoore @sbesson ?

Copy link
Member

@joshmoore joshmoore left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@dstansby
Copy link
Contributor Author

dstansby commented May 19, 2024

👍 changelog in the right place now.

@dstansby dstansby requested a review from joshmoore May 19, 2024 17:26
@joshmoore joshmoore merged commit aa178a0 into ome:master May 22, 2024
20 checks passed
@dstansby dstansby deleted the isotropic-chunks branch May 22, 2024 09:04
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.

write_image with scalar chunks only sets chunks of last axis
3 participants