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

Mem allocations (and other miscellaneous improvements) #178

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Nov 1, 2024

Conversation

a-frantz
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@a-frantz a-frantz self-assigned this Aug 19, 2024
@a-frantz a-frantz marked this pull request as ready for review November 1, 2024 20:21
@a-frantz
Copy link
Member Author

a-frantz commented Nov 1, 2024

This has been sitting in a draft state for a long time, and it's going to be a long time till I can get back to this. IMO we just merge these improvements to clear the queue. This was planned as a much larger PR than it is now.


Int disk_size_gb = ceil((bam_size + gtf_size) * 4) + 10 + modify_disk_size_gb
Int disk_size_gb = ceil((bam_size + gtf_size) * if pos_sorted then 4 else 1) + 10 + modify_disk_size_gb
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is this sufficient to resort and save a name-sorted BAM? Those are typically much larger than the position-sorted BAM.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

There's no resorting of name sorted BAMs. HTSeq requires a name sort for its algorithm, so resorts position sorted.

@a-frantz a-frantz merged commit 092bb0c into main Nov 1, 2024
32 of 34 checks passed
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants