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 support for MERSI-1 on FY-3A/B/C #2795

Open
wants to merge 43 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

yukaribbba
Copy link
Contributor

@yukaribbba yukaribbba commented Apr 28, 2024

  • Tests added
  • Fully documented
  • RSR for pyspectral

Datasets for test:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1cCoC14AioC2l34jFfxa19F88k5NXuqpi/view?usp=sharing

  1. FY-3A:
    image

  2. FY_3B:
    image

  3. FY_3C:
    image

@yukaribbba
Copy link
Contributor Author

pre-commit.ci autofix

@yukaribbba
Copy link
Contributor Author

@djhoese One of the CI test keeps failing on macos-latest, 3.9, false. I don't know what's going on.

=========================== short test summary info ============================
FAILED satpy/tests/reader_tests/test_sar_c_safe.py::TestSAFEGRD::test_read_lon_lats - AssertionError: 
Not equal to tolerance rtol=1e-07, atol=0

Mismatched elements: 3 / 256 (1.17%)
Max absolute difference: 4.98866104e-09
Max relative difference: 2.33333333
 x: array([[ 2.081090e-16,  5.91[666](https://github.com/pytroll/satpy/actions/runs/8872941895/job/24358006466?pr=2795#step:9:667)7e-01,  9.097222e-01,  1.000000e+00,
         9.083333e-01,  6.805556e-01,  3.625000e-01, -1.110223e-16,
        -3.611111e-01, -6.750000e-01, -8.958333e-01, -9.777778e-01,...
 y: array([[ 3.794929e-16,  5.916[667](https://github.com/pytroll/satpy/actions/runs/8872941895/job/24358006466?pr=2795#step:9:668)e-01,  9.097222e-01,  1.000000e+00,
         9.083333e-01,  6.805556e-01,  3.625000e-01,  8.326673e-17,
        -3.611111e-01, -6.750000e-01, -8.958333e-01, -9.777778e-01,...
= 1 failed, 2541 passed, 4 skipped, 5 xfailed, 1 xpassed, 443 warnings in 352.85s (0:05:52) =

@djhoese
Copy link
Member

djhoese commented Apr 29, 2024

Yes. This is a known problem with a scipy update causing a test failure. It is being looked at.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Apr 29, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 95.94%. Comparing base (3b9c04e) to head (f48d740).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2795      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   95.95%   95.94%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         379      379              
  Lines       53888    53764     -124     
==========================================
- Hits        51708    51585     -123     
+ Misses       2180     2179       -1     
Flag Coverage Δ
behaviourtests 4.10% <0.00%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
unittests 96.04% <100.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

Copy link
Member

@djhoese djhoese left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I know this is still a draft, but I'm curious if there are actual differences between the datasets for the 3 satellite instruments. If they're the same channels then maybe the 3 readers could be combined into a single "mersi_l1b" reader?

@yukaribbba
Copy link
Contributor Author

Well it's kinda annoying here that there are no genuine differences inside the datasets but they are still organized in different forms. So I think merging them into one could be a little bit messy for the users...

@djhoese
Copy link
Member

djhoese commented Apr 29, 2024

Yeah MERSI and AGRI were the two instruments I think of with designs like that (new version of the instrument, but completely different numbering/ordering of channels).

@yukaribbba
Copy link
Contributor Author

pre-commit.ci autofix

@yukaribbba
Copy link
Contributor Author

pre-commit.ci autofix

@yukaribbba
Copy link
Contributor Author

@djhoese Some of the CI failed again. But at least the tests passed.

@yukaribbba yukaribbba marked this pull request as ready for review May 1, 2024 15:17
@yukaribbba yukaribbba requested a review from mraspaud as a code owner May 1, 2024 15:17
@yukaribbba yukaribbba requested a review from djhoese May 1, 2024 15:18
@djhoese
Copy link
Member

djhoese commented May 2, 2024

I restarted the CI. Very odd error from the test coverage reporting tool so let's see if it fixes itself...

@yukaribbba
Copy link
Contributor Author

Failed again....

@djhoese
Copy link
Member

djhoese commented May 2, 2024

Looks like a major release of the coveralls python package causing issues: https://pypi.org/project/coveralls/

I have appointments half of today, but I'll try debugging later.

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented May 10, 2024

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 9171394924

Details

  • 261 of 261 (100.0%) changed or added relevant lines in 2 files are covered.
  • No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
  • Overall coverage decreased (-0.007%) to 96.025%

Totals Coverage Status
Change from base Build 9157044280: -0.007%
Covered Lines: 51457
Relevant Lines: 53587

💛 - Coveralls

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.

None yet

3 participants