Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Dec 11, 2023. It is now read-only.

Support data integrity bug identification #86

Open
ChrisKeefe opened this issue Apr 29, 2022 · 1 comment
Open

Support data integrity bug identification #86

ChrisKeefe opened this issue Apr 29, 2022 · 1 comment

Comments

@ChrisKeefe
Copy link
Collaborator

The existence of a queryable DiGraph (ProvDAG.dag) gives us the power to identify bugs (software, system, or user-originated) at the analysis level. Providing centralized infrastructure where developers can register known-buggy situations could help improve the reliability of QIIME 2 Results, and reduce both user and developer time spent diagnosing problems.

@ChrisKeefe
Copy link
Collaborator Author

ChrisKeefe commented Apr 29, 2022

It might be useful to think about bugs in terms of what scale of data we need to identify them.
A bug might be identifiable

  • without considering action.yaml data
  • from a single Action
  • from multiple Actions captured within a single Result
  • from multiple Results only.

The two middle points seem the most likely, and are probably the most valuable to prioritize in development. (e.g. should bug-checking occur while creating ProvNodes, or higher up, at the parser level). The final point is probably best addressed by querying the full ProvDAG once parsing is finished, which might render failures later than is convenient for users with large Result collections.

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant