Implement array hashing in merge, as done in concatenate
Nobody has claimed this yet.
Assessment
- Difficulty
- 3/5
- Estimated time
- 1-2 days
- Newbie friendliness
- 55/100
- Issue type
- Bug
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Activity status
- Quiet
- Tech stack
- python
- Domain
- performance
Research direction
Start by comparing how merge handles arrays with the existing array-hashing behavior in concatenate, focusing on large and lazy aux-coords. Read the linked example from issue 7063 to understand the slow case. Done means merge uses equivalent array hashing and avoids the reported performance problem.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Description
Without this, merge can be very slow with large aux-coords, and especially with lazy ones
See example
- Dominant language
- Python
- Stars
- 724
- Forks
- 317
- Avg merge
- 3d 20h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 9
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
More from SciTools/iris
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 65/100
-
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 78/100
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 78/100
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 84/100
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 62/100
Similar issues
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 74/100
bancolombia/sentinel#23 ·
-
test md OpenCI
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 74/100
-
integration:quickjs org:external priority:backlog topic:code-interpreter topic:middleware type:feature
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 74/100
langchain-ai/deepagents#6450 ·
-
bug client
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 88/100
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 74/100