You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Per discussion on LMG1906 after an interruption in the data collection, we would like to see the capability of identifying and characterizing interruptions in the data collection
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Would this request be more appropriately addressed in a daily QA task
performed by a stand-alone process vs in Realtime? R2r already has
serveral QA processes that they use post-cruise for QA. Perhaps the easier
solution to this problem would be to perform their QA checks on a regular
basis at-sea.
Definitely want to do it in daily QA as well, but I'm pretty confident that it can be added to live processing with something like a TimestampGapTransform() that would just examine timestamps of the records it receives and only emits a record if there's a gap larger than N.
Ok, I need to learn more about how RVDAS can do these things. For historical reasons I’m always going to vote to limit RVDAS to data collection, real-time transformations and real-time QA. I’ve just seen too many good programs ruined by job creep.
Per discussion on LMG1906 after an interruption in the data collection, we would like to see the capability of identifying and characterizing interruptions in the data collection
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: