[DAMD-86] Please add another digit to catId Created: 04/Aug/20 Updated: 05/Jan/21 Resolved: 10/Sep/20 |
|
| Status: | Done |
| Project: | Data Model |
| Component/s: | None |
| Affects Version/s: | None |
| Fix Version/s: | None |
| Type: | Story | Priority: | Normal |
| Reporter: | rhl | Assignee: | hassan |
| Resolution: | Done | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | None | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Issue Links: |
|
||||||||
| Sprint: | 2DDRP-2021 A | ||||||||
| Reviewers: | price | ||||||||
| Description |
|
I specified the catId formats as %03d, but upon further consideration and discussion with Masayuki Tanaka I think we should change this to %04d. The problem is that open-use may well define a catId for every program, and 1000 may not be enough. |
| Comments |
| Comment by Masayuki Tanaka [ 24/Aug/20 ] |
|
I started to think that we may even want %05d if we consider more than 10 years of science operations with PFS. If we accept 100 programs per year (including fillers), each of which comes with 5 different catId's on average, we will have 5000 catId's in 10 years, Given that each of the numbers here comes with an uncertainty, I think it is safer to adopt %05d. |
| Comment by hassan [ 24/Aug/20 ] |
|
Ok. I don't think there are any issues with accommodating this. If there are no objections by Weds Aug 26 I'll implement %05d. |
| Comment by Pierre-Yves CHABAUD [ 24/Aug/20 ] |
|
Ok, %05d will be also implemented on 1D drp |
| Comment by Ali Allaoui [ 08/Sep/20 ] |
|
Datamodel python code is incomplete, python/pfs/datamodel/drp.py must be edited to allow correct writing and parsing of pfsObject. I can update branch tickets/
|