NOTICE: This version of the NSF Unidata web site (archive.unidata.ucar.edu) is no longer being updated.
Current content can be found at unidata.ucar.edu.

Re: [netcdfgroup] better to distribute data in netCDF-4/classic or netcdf-3?

  • To: Heiko Klein <Heiko.Klein@xxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [netcdfgroup] better to distribute data in netCDF-4/classic or netcdf-3?
  • From: Doug Hunt <dhunt@xxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 10:33:03 -0600 (MDT)
Hi all: I would second that (a recommendation to stick with netcdf-3). Our software suite still does not include netcdf-4 due to the difficulity of getting it compiled under CentOS 6.3. 

Regards,

  Doug Hunt

dhunt@xxxxxxxx
Software Engineer
UCAR - COSMIC, Tel. (303) 497-2611

On Sat, 11 Aug 2012, Heiko Klein wrote:
Unless you really see an improvement e.g. in file-size (i.e. netcdf4-compression) I would still go for netcdf-3.
Ubuntu 10.04 does only include netcdf3-libraries, and it has a end-of-life for desktops in April 2013 and for servers in April 2015. It is really hard (e.g. it took me 2 days as experienced system administrator, and that was after our scientist had given up) to install nco with netcdf4. Such investments need a good reason.
I don't know about other OSes, but you should maybe check ScientificLinux/CentOS/Redhat, Debian and SuSE. 


Heiko

On 2012-08-09 23:05, Lynnes, Christopher S. (GSFC-6102) wrote:
Our refactored visualization system, Giovanni, will be distributing intermediate and end products as netCDF.
My question to the community is: should we distribute in netCDF-3 or netCDF-4/classic? Are enough of the main netCDF tools updated to work with netCDF-4 / classic by now to make the switch? 
Or any other reason why we might want to hang back at netCDF-3?
--
Dr. Christopher Lynnes     NASA/GSFC, Code 610.2    phone: 301-614-5185



_______________________________________________
netcdfgroup mailing list
netcdfgroup@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
For list information or to unsubscribe, visit: http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/mailing_lists/