May the 4th
May the 4th
Attending: Sanket Verma (SV), Ryan Abernathey (RA), Josh Moore (JM), Ishan Bansal (IB), John Kirkham (JK), Hailey Johnson (HJ), Shivank (SH), Brianna Rita Pagán (BRP), Dennis Heimbigner (DH), Jeremy Maitin-Shepard (JMS), Parth Tripathi (PT), Eric Perlman (EP), Jonathan Striebel (JS), Martin Durant (MD), Greg Lee (GL), Matt McCormick (MM), Davis Bennett (DB)
Introductions (new things & favorite places)
- Brianna: tech. lead at NASA for migrating data & services to the cloud
Updates (SV):
- ZEP is on the verge of acceptance & merging. Check here
- ZIC invites sent. Check issues here
- Merged PRs:
- Suggestions for the Zarr Community. Add here
- Please have a look at the recent poll here
- Thoughts on recording the community calls?
- EP: more no (except presentations)
- JK: more no
- IV: R implementation?
- JM: a libzarr out of netcdf-c
- DH: possibly. (need to look at turning NC3 off)
- WF: if we had someone to maintain it, then it’s a no-brainer
- DH: what API would we use. NC API is a pretty good match.
- IV: good tooling for wrapping python in R. works almost seamlessly.
- JM: libzarr would also get us MATLAB
- WF: It would be a lot of work, and we have the code in the netCDF-C repo is available for poaching. Collaborating to create a pure C Zarr library would be in our (Unidata/netCDF-C)’s interest and an easier lift than splitting it out/maintaining it ourself
- WF: license, etc. should not be an issue.
- IV: there were some C++ folks on the bioconductor side
- JK: invite bioconductor to next meeting?
Topics:
- ZEP process:
- MD: approve :tada:
- etc. etc.
- ergo ZEP 0 merged :tada:
- BRP: geospatial standards (matching to https://cfconventions.org/)
- RA: read the OGC document?
- BRP: No, gone through geozarr
- RA: started mapping via xarray cf to zarr
- RA: OGC is voting on accepting zarr, wrapper with a preface on conventions (named dimensions, netcdf data model, coordinate reference systems)
- RA: NASA really cares about OGC and zarr is on track to be accepted
- RA: geozarr is newer and more proscriptive
- BRP: battling with CRS since it’s not in cf
- RA: unidata would say there’s a way.
- BRP: but it’s not required
- RA: suggest getting behind geozarr (1 person at ESA)
- …add stuff here…
- RA: What’s ZEP 1 going to be? start wih JMS’ comments on breakingness?
- see: https://github.com/zarr-developers/zarr-specs/issues/140
- MD: list of chunks!
- non-breaking is passing a range of a chunk to the backend storage (“simple sharding”)
- RA: like being able to push selections to the store
- MD: in v2 getitems (that’s fsstore only)
- JS: in sharding proposal, there are other methods for getting ranges for keys & multiple keys at once and as a combination (pre-requisite for efficient sharding)
- MD: want to uncompress things that you don’t know anything about
- JS: there are hooks for blosc, e.g.. Adding this interface would help, since it’s currently quite hacked.
- MD: simple enough and nice that will enable sharding? good for prototying ZEP
- JMS: there are breaking changes that don’t change the data model in a significant way; “feature-flags” as important breaking addition
- JS: transformer infrastructure also
- RA: does anyone expect current v3 implementations to break?
- JMS: v3 isn’t a huge change; mostly isomorphic
- RA: explicit extensibility of the protocol? (on top of the re-org)
- JK:
None
fill value etc. that just needed cleaning up- also moving towards sparse arrays. please for people to explore.
- RA: tl;dr
- ZEP1 to get motivation (co-editors welcome)
- ZEP2 e.g. sharding
- ZEP3 e.g. variables chunks
- SV: doesn’t need to be sequential editing but sequential merging!
- RA: worried about fragmentation
- will say in ZEP1, but want a strong core that all should implement
- avoid driving people away
- JS: happy to help with the spec, but not great for the ZEP
- JMS: also happy to help with the spec
- RA: will reach out to Alistair (SV: was waiting on ZEP0 to be merged)
- RA: THANKS SANKET!
- SV: Davis from April meeting, propose to add “auto” setting
- DB: “inaction item”. Perhaps by the end of the week.
- Misc
- new teams any comments? :thumbsup:
- build docs for PRs? good idea.
- SV: pyscript!
- MD: super interesting for Zarr. friendly for the browser. no sockets. no threads. suggestion that it might lead to a lot of hype. involved for the IO conversations. (couple of years until its really usable for heavy data workloads)
- links
- https://github.com/WebAssembly/wasi-sockets
- https://github.com/WebAssembly/threads
- https://github.com/pyscript/pyscript
- DB: performance? MD: good, except for populating the browser (it’s a VM)
- DB: had seen 2.5x in favor of native
- MD: more browser as the interface so that you don’t need an ipython kernel running somewhere
- MD: long-term talking about how to run numba in the browser (acceleration tricks that make regular python fast). could be that numpy in the browser is <50% slower
- JK: fortran is a problem (e.g. scipy is hard to build)
- MD: not a ton of javascript stuff around zarr. either:
- tile servers are good enough for pure visualization
- and/or people using zarr are doing data processing (parallelism)
- DB: an