| 2014-10-20 13:15:17 |
Michele Simionato |
bug |
|
|
added bug |
| 2014-10-21 08:25:23 |
Michele Simionato |
description |
The idea is to have configuration parameters specific_assets and specific_assets_csv to specify the assets where the event loss should be stored.
Moreover we want to perform disaggregation only on the specified assets. |
The idea is to have configuration parameters specific_assets and specific_assets_csv to specify the assets where the event loss should be stored.
Moreover we want to perform disaggregation only on the specified assets.
We should clarify what to do when the specific_assets files contains asset_refs not in the exposure (for instance due to a misprint).
Should we:
1) simply ignore the non-existing assets
2) print a warning
3) raise an error? |
|
| 2014-10-21 08:25:55 |
Michele Simionato |
oq-engine: assignee |
|
Michele Simionato (michele-simionato) |
|
| 2014-10-21 08:25:57 |
Michele Simionato |
oq-engine: milestone |
|
1.0.1 |
|
| 2014-10-21 08:26:00 |
Michele Simionato |
oq-engine: importance |
Undecided |
Critical |
|
| 2014-10-21 08:26:05 |
Michele Simionato |
oq-engine: status |
New |
In Progress |
|
| 2014-10-21 08:32:04 |
Michele Simionato |
description |
The idea is to have configuration parameters specific_assets and specific_assets_csv to specify the assets where the event loss should be stored.
Moreover we want to perform disaggregation only on the specified assets.
We should clarify what to do when the specific_assets files contains asset_refs not in the exposure (for instance due to a misprint).
Should we:
1) simply ignore the non-existing assets
2) print a warning
3) raise an error? |
The idea is to have configuration parameters specific_assets and specific_assets_csv to specify the assets where the event loss should be stored.
Moreover we want to perform disaggregation only on the specified assets.
We should clarify what to do when the specific_assets files contains asset_refs not in the exposure (for instance due to a misprint).
Should we:
1) simply ignore the non-existing assets
2) print a warning
3) raise an error?
Moreover, if a rupture gives a null loss to an asset, should we save the zero or not? |
|
| 2014-10-21 08:57:04 |
Michele Simionato |
description |
The idea is to have configuration parameters specific_assets and specific_assets_csv to specify the assets where the event loss should be stored.
Moreover we want to perform disaggregation only on the specified assets.
We should clarify what to do when the specific_assets files contains asset_refs not in the exposure (for instance due to a misprint).
Should we:
1) simply ignore the non-existing assets
2) print a warning
3) raise an error?
Moreover, if a rupture gives a null loss to an asset, should we save the zero or not? |
The idea is to have configuration parameters specific_assets and specific_assets_csv to specify the assets where the event loss should be stored.
Moreover we want to perform disaggregation only on the specified assets.
We should clarify what to do when the specific_assets files contains asset_refs not in the exposure (for instance due to a misprint).
Should we:
1) simply ignore the non-existing assets
2) print a warning
3) raise an error?
Moreover, if a rupture gives a null loss to an asset, should we save the zero or not? Saving a zero is wasteful, but at least it is unambiguous (an asset could not appear because of a bug, not because its loss is zero).
Should we add a demo demoing the new feature? |
|
| 2014-10-21 09:20:18 |
Michele Simionato |
description |
The idea is to have configuration parameters specific_assets and specific_assets_csv to specify the assets where the event loss should be stored.
Moreover we want to perform disaggregation only on the specified assets.
We should clarify what to do when the specific_assets files contains asset_refs not in the exposure (for instance due to a misprint).
Should we:
1) simply ignore the non-existing assets
2) print a warning
3) raise an error?
Moreover, if a rupture gives a null loss to an asset, should we save the zero or not? Saving a zero is wasteful, but at least it is unambiguous (an asset could not appear because of a bug, not because its loss is zero).
Should we add a demo demoing the new feature? |
The idea is to have configuration parameters specific_assets and specific_assets_csv to specify the assets where the event loss should be stored.
Moreover we want to perform disaggregation only on the specified assets.
We should clarify what to do when the specific_assets file contains asset_refs not in the exposure (for instance due to a misprint).
Should we:
1) simply ignore the non-existing assets
2) print a warning
3) raise an error?
Moreover, if a rupture gives a null loss to an asset, should we save the zero or not? Saving a zero is wasteful, but at least it is unambiguous (an asset could not appear because of a bug, not because its loss is zero).
Should we add a demo demoing the new feature? |
|
| 2014-10-31 08:50:45 |
Michele Simionato |
oq-engine: status |
In Progress |
Fix Committed |
|
| 2014-12-15 11:53:53 |
Daniele Viganò |
oq-engine: status |
Fix Committed |
Fix Released |
|
