On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 2:48 AM, Jeff Whitaker <jswhit@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> John Storrs wrote:
<snip>
>> Coming to storage of the time coordinate variable. If we actually store the
>> data, it will need to be in a double array to avoid loss of precision.
>> Aleternatively we could define the variable as an integer with a double
scale
>> and offset. Both of these sound inefficient. Traditionally we store this
>> type of data as a (sequence of) triple: start time, time increment, count.
>> Clearly we can do that within a convention, expanding it in reader code.
>> How should we handle this?
>>
>
> The standard way is to create a time variable with units "<time
> increments> since <start time>".
I'm relatively new to HDF5/netCDF...
If storage size is the primary concern, then read time and write time
does not matter, is there any sense in adding dimensions to the data
set to store time, say dimensions for: hr,min,sec,msec ?
Mark
> HTH,
>
> -Jeff
>> Your comments would be appreciated.
>>
>> Regards
>> John Storrs
>>
>> --
>> John Storrs, Experiments Dept e-mail: john.storrs@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Building D3, UKAEA Fusion tel: 01235 466338
>> Culham Science Centre fax: 01235 466379
>> Abingdon, Oxfordshire OX14 3DB http://www.fusion.org.uk
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> netcdfgroup mailing list
>> netcdfgroup@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> For list information or to unsubscribe, visit:
> http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/mailing_lists/
>>
>
>
> --
> Jeffrey S. Whitaker Phone : (303)497-6313
> Meteorologist FAX : (303)497-6449
> NOAA/OAR/PSD R/PSD1 Email : Jeffrey.S.Whitaker@xxxxxxxx
> 325 Broadway Office : Skaggs Research Cntr 1D-113
> Boulder, CO, USA 80303-3328 Web : http://tinyurl.com/5telg
>
> _______________________________________________
> netcdfgroup mailing list
> netcdfgroup@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> For list information or to unsubscribe, visit:
http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/mailing_lists/
>
