[Datastream #VTL-983286]: antarctic composite

Hi Don,

I got reminded that this ticket was still open by eSupport.  I decided
to take a second look, and I found that someone (Robb?) had
setup the LDM 'scour' utility to scour most, if not all, of the
directories that are served through the RTIMAGES group back to 2
days.  The use of 'scour' for the directories in question was/is
incorrect since the content was being managed by the McIDAS 'scourBYday'
script which was set to save 45 days of data (I just changed this to
30).  So, pretty much most of the datasets in the RTIMAGES group
have very short rolling archives at the moment.  This will change over
the next month until we get back to what was originally intended.

Don Murray wrote:
> Thanks for the explanation. I hadn't run the bundle in a while, so I
> don't know how long this has been a problem. How far back does IMAGEALL
> go?  I tried that, but it seemed to have the same amount of data.
> 
> Sorry to hear about your construction woes.  You would hope that if your
> explanation of increasing the efficiency of the house by redoing the sun
> room would persuade BC to approve the permit.  But logic never enters
> into these things.  I guess you'll just have to redo the kitchen!
> 
> Don
> 
> On 10/31/13 4:24 PM, Unidata Datastream Support wrote:
> > Hi Don,
> >
> > re:
> >> I was running one of my bundles today:
> >>
> >> http://ramadda.psd.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/repository/entry/get/antarctica.xidv?entryid=8a7479fe-31b9-446a-8c52-effdf0c68156
> >>
> >> and noticed that the number of antarctic images I get is less than I was
> >> getting when I made the bundle.  I haven't run this for a while, but was
> >> wondering if this was the shortening of the data retention made a while
> >> ago, or further sequestration has been imposed.
> >
> > No, there should be 96 of the most recent images in the "current" set; this
> > number was not reduced during the overall reduction in number of days to
> > keep on motherlode (due to rapidly decreasing amount of available disk
> > space).  I just logged into adde.ucar.edu (aka motherlode) and see that
> > the reception of the Antarctic composites has been spotty at best for
> > quite awhile.  The same thing is true for the Mollweide IR and WV products.
> > At the same time, the store of Antarctic composites available on
> > atm.ucar.edu, where I created and am running a backup to the 
> > Unidata-Wisconsin
> > datastream in test mode, is what it should be.  This would seem to indicate
> > a problem in the source of the Unidata-Wisconsin images, 
> > unidata2.ssec.wisc.edu.
> > I will need to investigate!
> >
> > Also, in case you are interested, I have been lobbying (Mike) to move the
> > creation of the Unidata-Wisconsin datastream to "the cloud" (we have a
> > virtual machine in Amazon's EC2).  I also want to stage the full 
> > Unidata-Wisconsin
> > archive in "the cloud" and use it to test how much traffic might be 
> > generated
> > by free and open access to a long-term, but not large, satellite data 
> > archive.
> > What do you think?
> >
> > re:
> >> Hope you are doing well.
> >
> > Things continue as usual.  The only big thing that has happened lately is 
> > that
> > we got the Sugarloaf house resided with fiber cement board.  The job is 
> > about
> > one third done, and it is in doubt when the second and third phases will
> > be done.  The second phase is to have faux stone installed on the chimney
> > and east side foundation, and the third phase is to have the sunroom walls
> > extended down to the ground where the area will be made into a room
> > that will have 5 windows and a sliding glass door.  The third phase is
> > aimed at increasing the efficiency of our sunroom -- too much heat is lost
> > through the existing sunroom floor in the cold of winter.  This effort is
> > being held up by Boulder County not issuing a permit.  As I hear it from
> > the contractor, BC's position is that the extra 160 square feet will make
> > the house too large for the lot it is on (or some such nonsense)!  The
> > contractor has requested a review meeting, but those are at least a month
> > off, so it is unlikely that the sunroom extension will get done this year
> > if at all.  We think that BC's position on this is ridiculous since the
> > work will not increase the house's footprint at all, and it will make the
> > house that much more energy efficient.  The contractor told us that BC
> > wants to impose a rule that all new houses >= 4000 sq ft will have to be
> > energy self sufficient.  I guess that we have to demonstrate to them
> > that we already meet rules that may to into effect sometime in the future,
> > but the only way to do this is in a review meeting, and their docket
> > is full for the next month.  The big problem is in the work getting
> > delayed until it is too cold to pour a concrete foundation for the new
> > room (sigh).
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Tom
 

Cheers,

Tom
--
****************************************************************************
Unidata User Support                                    UCAR Unidata Program
(303) 497-8642                                                 P.O. Box 3000
address@hidden                                   Boulder, CO 80307
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unidata HomePage                       http://www.unidata.ucar.edu
****************************************************************************


Ticket Details
===================
Ticket ID: VTL-983286
Department: Support Datastream
Priority: High
Status: Closed