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

Changelog for splits is missing elements in after_root_ids #473

Open
bdpedigo opened this issue Oct 11, 2023 · 1 comment
Open

Changelog for splits is missing elements in after_root_ids #473

bdpedigo opened this issue Oct 11, 2023 · 1 comment

Comments

@bdpedigo
Copy link
Contributor

Example

Requires caveclient, but I think is more an issue with what pychunkedgraph is returning

For splits, get_tabular_change_log only shows one "after_root_ids" per operation:

Code

import caveclient as cc
import pandas as pd

client = cc.CAVEclient("minnie65_phase3_v1")

cg = client.chunkedgraph

root_id = 864691136143786292

change_log = cg.get_tabular_change_log(root_id)[root_id]
change_log.set_index("operation_id", inplace=True)

splits = change_log.query("~is_merge")

splits["after_root_ids"].head()

Output

operation_id
244007    [864691136020603640]
244012    [864691135799937890]
244040    [864691135274393061]
244043    [864691135472223282]
244050    [864691136521807761]
Name: after_root_ids, dtype: object

Compare to get_operation_details

Code

details = cg.get_operation_details(splits.index.to_list())
details = pd.DataFrame(details).T
details["roots"].head()

Output

244007    [864691136309915226, 864691136020603640]
244012    [864691135737704049, 864691135799937890]
244040    [864691135700510587, 864691135274393061]
244043    [864691135182021634, 864691135472223282]
244050    [864691136444023171, 864691136521807761]
Name: roots, dtype: object

The latter properly returns both root ids that were created from a split operation.

@bdpedigo
Copy link
Contributor Author

update: after talking to Forrest, I see that the only one returned in roots is the child of the split operation that was associated with the original root_id query. still think it might be nice to have both stored in the table somehow

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

1 participant