Dear All,
The whole cron.sh was humming a long nicely on our MSNoise network, until I
changed from stacking 1,2 and 5 days (initially) to 1,2,3,4,5,30 days. Now,
all steps seem to run UNTIL the plot command. Here is the error (after
putting a print statement on the cause of the problem, df):
(I run as sudo, because root is running the cron.sh overnight:)
[kasper@localhost MSNoise-master]$ sudo python s07plot_dtt.py
loading 1 days
Empty DataFrame
Columns: [A, EA, EM, EM0, M, M0, Pairs]
Index: []
Empty DataFrame
Columns: [A, EA, EM, EM0, M, M0, Pairs]
Index: []
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "s07plot_dtt.py", line 102, in <module>
alldf = alldf.append(df)
File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/pandas/core/frame.py", line
4266, in append
verify_integrity=verify_integrity)
File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/pandas/tools/merge.py", line
883, in concat
return op.get_result()
File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/pandas/tools/merge.py", line
964, in get_result
new_data = self._get_concatenated_data()
File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/pandas/tools/merge.py", line
1007, in _get_concatenated_data
new_data[item] = self._concat_single_item(rdata, item)
File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/pandas/tools/merge.py", line
1094, in _concat_single_item
return com._concat_compat(to_concat, axis=self.axis - 1)
File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/pandas/core/common.py", line
1191, in _concat_compat
axis=axis)
ValueError: need at least one array to concatenate
Hi Thomas;
Congratulations for this new paper! I can’t wait to use those new features.
Esteban
Graduate Student in Seismology
University of California Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz, California 95064
echavess(a)ucsc.edu
On May 5, 2014, at 5:00 AM, msnoise-request(a)mailman-as.oma.be wrote:
> Send MSNoise mailing list submissions to
> msnoise(a)mailman-as.oma.be
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://mailman-as.oma.be/mailman/listinfo/msnoise
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> msnoise-request(a)mailman-as.oma.be
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> msnoise-owner(a)mailman-as.oma.be
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of MSNoise digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. MSNoise in SRL (Thomas Lecocq)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 05 May 2014 12:55:53 +0200
> From: Thomas Lecocq <thomas.lecocq(a)oma.be>
> To: msnoise(a)mailman-as.oma.be
> Subject: [MSNoise] MSNoise in SRL
> Message-ID: <53676E39.9040407(a)oma.be>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Dear MSNoise users,
>
> I'm very pleased to announce that the paper Corentin, Florent and I
> submitted 1 year ago has finally been published in the Electronic
> Seismologist (ES) column in the May/June issue of Seismological Research
> Letters ! The great advantage of ES is that it is fully open access !!
>
> here is the link :
> http://srl.geoscienceworld.org/content/85/3/715.full
>
>
> Now that 1.2.4 is out (some odd bugs were corrected), I'm planning on
> those changes/additions:
>
> for 1.2.5:
> - correctly computing autocorrelation
> - correcting the cron.sh code and better logging
>
>> = 1.3:
> - adding support for instrument response removal
> - adding the new configuration interface (you're going to love this
> one !)
> - adding more plot_* functions / interaction examples
>
> Best regards from Brussels,
>
> Thomas
>
> --
> Dr. Thomas Lecocq
> Geologist
>
> Seismology - Gravimetry
> Royal Observatory of Belgium
>
> *
> * * * * *
> * * * *
> ---------
> http://www.seismology.be
> http://twitter.com/#!/Seismologie_be
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> MSNoise mailing list
> MSNoise(a)mailman-as.oma.be
> http://mailman-as.oma.be/mailman/listinfo/msnoise
>
>
> End of MSNoise Digest, Vol 7, Issue 3
> *************************************
Dear MSNoise users,
I'm very pleased to announce that the paper Corentin, Florent and I
submitted 1 year ago has finally been published in the Electronic
Seismologist (ES) column in the May/June issue of Seismological Research
Letters ! The great advantage of ES is that it is fully open access !!
here is the link :
http://srl.geoscienceworld.org/content/85/3/715.full
Now that 1.2.4 is out (some odd bugs were corrected), I'm planning on
those changes/additions:
for 1.2.5:
- correctly computing autocorrelation
- correcting the cron.sh code and better logging
>= 1.3:
- adding support for instrument response removal
- adding the new configuration interface (you're going to love this
one !)
- adding more plot_* functions / interaction examples
Best regards from Brussels,
Thomas
--
Dr. Thomas Lecocq
Geologist
Seismology - Gravimetry
Royal Observatory of Belgium
*
* * * * *
* * * *
---------
http://www.seismology.behttp://twitter.com/#!/Seismologie_be
Dear mailing list,
I have computed 001_day_stacks between a station
pair for the year 2013. Of course, there are some gaps/lack
of data
during the year, so I do not have daily stacks for some days of
2013.
When I move to the next step of stacking these 001_day_stacks,
new files are appearing as stacks, with dates on
which I didn't have
data.
For example, I have 001_day_stacks for February, from 5th to
28th, except from the days 9,10,14,15,22, and 23.
After the 005_days
stacking, there are some files that are appearing as 005_days stacks
with dates form the days
(9,10,14,15,22, and 23) on which I didn't have
data. The same thing happens for the other months also. It seems that,
somehow, the missing days within the months are filled after
stacking.
Additionally, some other files as 005_days stacks are
appearing with dates after the 31st of December 2013 (for example
2014-01-01.MSEED, 2014-01-02.MSEED...).
I have attached 3 screen-shots
of the folders that are containing the files for daily
cross-correlations, 005_days_stacks
and 010_days_stacks for helping you
have a picture of what I am talking about. You can observe the same
problem
in the 010_days stacks.
Which daily stacks created the
005_days stack of 2013-02-10.MSEED for example?
Or which daily stacks
created the 005_days stack of 2014-01-04.MSEED?
Is this normal or do I
have to arrange something before the stacking process?
Thank you very
much in advance.
Dimitris
Dear all,
I've tagged a new release on github. From the release notes:
/Thanks to some great early MSNoise adopters who reported
problems using the mailing-list, we have identified a few bugs and
tricky situations where some steps failed. This is the case for/
/
/
*
/scan_archive: there were major issues using Threads, this step
uses Process for multiprocessing, which is much safer. The only problem
remaining is that there is no more console-logging of the
found/identified files. To be corrected soon./
*
/new_jobs: mostly rewritten, all jobs are properly identified now. There should no more lost jobs !/
/I've also reflected those changes in the documentation.
/
To update your MSNoise install, just download the new .py files and
replace them. There is no compatibility issue, as the database schema
has not changed.
Thanks a lot, again, to all of you for your feedback (in- or off-list),
it helps making MSNoise more robust every day !
Cheers,
Thomas
//