Re: [netcdfgroup] better to distribute data in netCDF-4/classic or netcdf-3?

  • To: Heiko Klein <Heiko.Klein@xxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [netcdfgroup] better to distribute data in netCDF-4/classic or netcdf-3?
  • From: Doug Hunt <dhunt@xxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 10:33:03 -0600 (MDT)
Hi all: I would second that (a recommendation to stick with netcdf-3). Our software suite still does not include netcdf-4 due to the difficulity of getting it compiled under CentOS 6.3.

Regards,

  Doug Hunt

dhunt@xxxxxxxx
Software Engineer
UCAR - COSMIC, Tel. (303) 497-2611

On Sat, 11 Aug 2012, Heiko Klein wrote:

Unless you really see an improvement e.g. in file-size (i.e. netcdf4-compression) I would still go for netcdf-3.

Ubuntu 10.04 does only include netcdf3-libraries, and it has a end-of-life for desktops in April 2013 and for servers in April 2015. It is really hard (e.g. it took me 2 days as experienced system administrator, and that was after our scientist had given up) to install nco with netcdf4. Such investments need a good reason.

I don't know about other OSes, but you should maybe check ScientificLinux/CentOS/Redhat, Debian and SuSE.


Heiko

On 2012-08-09 23:05, Lynnes, Christopher S. (GSFC-6102) wrote:
Our refactored visualization system, Giovanni, will be distributing intermediate and end products as netCDF.

My question to the community is: should we distribute in netCDF-3 or netCDF-4/classic? Are enough of the main netCDF tools updated to work with netCDF-4 / classic by now to make the switch?
Or any other reason why we might want to hang back at netCDF-3?
--
Dr. Christopher Lynnes     NASA/GSFC, Code 610.2    phone: 301-614-5185


_______________________________________________
netcdfgroup mailing list
netcdfgroup@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
For list information or to unsubscribe, visit: http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/mailing_lists/



  • 2012 messages navigation, sorted by:
    1. Thread
    2. Subject
    3. Author
    4. Date
    5. ↑ Table Of Contents
  • Search the netcdfgroup archives: