Closed frolovsa closed 2 years ago
how will we handle non-bufr data, like IMS snow cover GRIB and tcvitals text files?
@HenryWinterbottom-NOAA take a look at the proposed directory tree structure for the clean bucket. your input would be appreciated.
how will we handle non-bufr data, like IMS snow cover GRIB and tcvitals text files?
I would imagine we would store it in something like reanalysis/snow/ims/yyyy/mm/grib
The addition of the last directory is new. NASA doesn't have it. I figure we might needed it in case we need to store data in several formats. I also imagine we would want to store auxiliary data like png images with data coverage in each file, etc.
how will we handle non-bufr data, like IMS snow cover GRIB and tcvitals text files?
@jswhit I would suggest we have a sub-directory structure as follows for the respective file types above.
GRIB: /grib
TCVitals: /syndat
-- this is the NCEP convention and will allow us to differentiate between synoptic TC-vitals and/or the hourly CIMSS derived TCVs (if we wish to maintain this capability)
Non-bufr: /obs
-- I think this is generic enough to be used for all non-standard file types; we could potentially do something like /obs_nc
if we wanted to further partition into file types (i.e., netcdf).
how will we handle non-bufr data, like IMS snow cover GRIB and tcvitals text files?
I would imagine we would store it in something like reanalysis/snow/ims/yyyy/mm/grib
The addition of the last directory is new. NASA doesn't have it. I figure we might needed it in case we need to store data in several formats. I also imagine we would want to store auxiliary data like png images with data coverage in each file, etc.
@frolovsa I like this idea. Segregating the file format types is the best path forward IMHO. Otherwise the buckets could potentially become what we have now on BDP (a mess).
Approved.
suggested initial directory structure closes issue #1