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

Wrong rendering of data having NaN values #109

Open
mtsales opened this issue Mar 21, 2018 · 7 comments
Open

Wrong rendering of data having NaN values #109

mtsales opened this issue Mar 21, 2018 · 7 comments

Comments

@mtsales
Copy link

mtsales commented Mar 21, 2018

I have datasets containing NaN values. These NaN values are rendered as a small value (1?) instead of being ignored

@guygriffiths
Copy link
Contributor

OK, can you provide some data that you're seeing this issue with?

@mtsales
Copy link
Author

mtsales commented Mar 21, 2018

Here it is

cru_TempMonthly_tmp_2015.zip

@guygriffiths
Copy link
Contributor

This looks like a bug in the NetCDF libraries we are using. I will report it to them and integrate their new versions once they fix it.

For further information, the data you supplied does not contain any NaN values. It contains integer values which use 99999 as a fill value, and which are scaled by a factor of 1e-5. The problem occurs when the CDM method tries to check whether the value is missing. The value being tested has the scaling applied (so 99999 becomes 0.99999), but is then tested against 99999.

@mtsales
Copy link
Author

mtsales commented Mar 21, 2018

Thanks! Much appreciated. I was checking the data in Panoply and there it shows as NaN. Sorry for the misinformation.

@guygriffiths
Copy link
Contributor

No problem, missing data tends to appear as NaNs once it has been processed, so it's a natural assumption to make. The extra information was primarily for benefit of the Unidata developers, since I've given them a link to this bug report so they have access to some test data.

@lesserwhirls
Copy link
Contributor

Fixed in 5.0.0-beta2 :-) Thanks for the report!

@guygriffiths
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks @lesserwhirls, that's been updated in develop and is all working nicely with the test dataset.

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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants