Closed darribas closed 3 years ago
Merging #112 (c9fa024) into master (982390a) will decrease coverage by
5.37%
. The diff coverage is23.94%
.
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #112 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 83.67% 78.30% -5.38%
==========================================
Files 15 15
Lines 680 742 +62
==========================================
+ Hits 569 581 +12
- Misses 111 161 +50
Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
tobler/area_weighted/__init__.py | 100.00% <ø> (ø) |
|
.../area_weighted/_vectorized_raster_interpolation.py | 63.88% <0.00%> (ø) |
|
tobler/dasymetric/__init__.py | 100.00% <ø> (ø) |
|
tobler/dasymetric/masked_area_interpolate.py | 90.90% <0.00%> (ø) |
|
tobler/tests/test_area_join.py | 100.00% <ø> (ø) |
|
tobler/tests/test_pysal_integration.py | 100.00% <ø> (ø) |
|
tobler/util/__init__.py | 100.00% <ø> (ø) |
|
tobler/area_weighted/area_interpolate.py | 67.76% <15.78%> (-16.11%) |
:arrow_down: |
tobler/model/glm.py | 90.00% <50.00%> (ø) |
|
tobler/tests/test_interpolators.py | 95.45% <66.66%> (-4.55%) |
:arrow_down: |
... and 4 more |
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact)
,ø = not affected
,? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 982390a...c9fa024. Read the comment docs.
does this supersede #110? or should we merge that while this is wip?
@knaaptime this builds on top of #110. We can merge that while this is in WIP.
@knaaptime this builds on top of #110. We can merge that while this is in WIP.
OK this implementation is ready and a test is added. this may fail as the parallel implementation requires master
versions of pygeos
and geopandas
.
tests are passing so im happy to merge this and get the new release ready. Following up on your earlier comment, do you want to add a warn
if someone invokes n_jobs
just to note that its in beta? Since we have the notebook and its not a breaking change i'm not sure its absolutely critical... presumably it shouldn't be too long before the required version of pygeos is released anyway?
GeoPandas 0.9 is expected within a month, pygeos 0.9 also soon (guessing from GitHub discussions).
Tests are passing because there's xfail
decorator on the parallel one, which would otherwise fail.
I think a warning is in order, will try to get to it asap :)
OK @knaaptime this is good to go as far as Martin and I is concerned. I've moved the performance notebook to the notebooks folder and added a note on the documentation for area_interpolate that if n_jobs
is not 1 you need edge pygeos/geopandas. Once that is released, we can remove the note or modify it with the version requirements.
Should we go ahead, merge and release so this makes it into the January PySAL release?
This takes the single-core implementation in #110 and adds multi-core processing for the spatial index query and the intersection/area calculation steps. Very much work in progress so not to merge yet, but I wanted to get the logic down and start a PR. @martinfleis and are hopefully working on this in early Jan and shipping a fully fledged version soon, it'd be great if we could take this one over the line for the January release of the metapackage? At any rate, this will go as "experimental" (possibly in its own separate function, independent of
_area_tables_binning
to show it's bleeding edge.cc' @martinfleis, @knaaptime, @sjsrey