-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
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
As a User I want to get results in the same order as they were in the input #13
Comments
Looks like this approach is not failproof, I am going to leave it in favor of just running one job. |
Having 2nd attempt |
As an alternative, it could allow a second column in the input file to specify an input unique ID to enable matching after the job completes.
And the response could include:
This way, an explicit map between the inputs and responses can be maintained, which could be preferable to simply matching both by indices. |
Hi @thompsonmj , thank you for the feedback! Do you mean using postprocessing to sort results by the unique IDs? |
Not necessarily to sort, but postprocessing to match the results to each input query string. I assume the desire to keep order of results identical to the order of query strings would be to match them together. Since the query string (e.g. |
I think I did understand your point @thompsonmj. Do I understand correctly, that you use command line |
Sorry, misread your reply. I use the CLI tool |
Oups, my bad, was working on Looks like you use file with names in a way I did not expect. I did not think it would be useful for people to run file with 'FacetedSearch' names in bulk, because quite often such searches return a lot of results and would probably require a human manual intervention to separate useful results from the bulk. Good to know that such usecase exist! |
can you check if |
Yes, setting just 1 job gives results back in the same order as they were entered. At ~200 names/sec, the speed is still excellent even for long lists! Though I feel multiple concurrent jobs with the ability to map results to input strings would be helpful if #115 (optional vernacular names) gets implemented for
We have a long list of organisms with a wide variety of taxonomic specificity that we want to get fully resolved taxonomic hierarchies for. Our preferred data source is GBIF, but they don't show up in all results, so we're doing some further reconciliation among tied top scoring results in those cases. I'm still determining the best way to get results to be as pinpointed as possible using the |
I think it is possible by setting up a queue using linked list and a listener.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: