Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Update batch regional download example #2
Update batch regional download example #2
Changes from 2 commits
1c9a07a
1e25ce9
edcdd83
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Although the library's syntax implies this is operating on a stream of chunks (and the documentation at https://fr.python-requests.org/en/latest/api.html also seems to imply this is the point of chunk_size), I wonder if this may actually buffer the entire response in memory. While that wouldn't be much of an issue when working with one geotiff at a time, it's probably not ideal to buffer an entire zip containing an unknown number of geotiffs. Commentary on stackoverflow seems to echo this concern: https://stackoverflow.com/q/16694907/778449
But other commentary specifically says iter_chunks exists to solve the buffering problem:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/46205586/why-to-use-iter-content-and-chunk-size-in-python-requests
There are also several edge cases that could occur when downloading and saving a large file, which might be better handled by a purpose-built "save a file" method instead of a simple loop over the content.
Side note: chunk_size is in bytes according to the Requests docs. 128 bytes is a very small chunk size for file IO. It is probably more efficient to work with larger sizes. But ideally a detail like this will be encapsulated in whatever method we use to save the file.
I will research better ways to handle this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Corresponding PR at #3.