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
Propagation and reduction of the metadata in MapDataset.stack #5228
Comments
Thanks @bkhelifi for bringing this up.
A similar question might arise for the estimators, where the question would be what meta info is propagated from the individual datasets. |
What should be the difference between |
For the fixity metadata, there is no staking (of course). We have to go through all individual metadata fields and make a proposal to VODF/CTA (ie @kosack , myself, ...). A spreadsheet and then we discuss to decide which to keep as unique, which to append, which to skip... |
@bkhelifi Internally in Gammapy I think we can almost always just propagate the meta data to the higher level by building hierarchical structures. There is not necessarily a need to reduce the meta data in each step, only if we find performance issues with Pydantic. The reduction can then finally happen when serializing. The problem with reducing the meta data "on the fly" is that different data formats might require different meta data. And "a priori" we cannot know to which format the user will serialize.
The metadata for the stacked dataset is transposed and homogenous in the type of datasets. The datasets meta data is not. |
No description provided.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: