From: Steve F. <sfi...@pc...> - 2005-07-17 20:37:01
|
gus folks- we are encountering a type of data that we haven't had to deal with yet, and I think the best way to handle it is a change to the schema. The change is: add: na_sequence_id to NALocation remove: na_sequence_id from NAFeature and all its subclasses. In other words, the location of a feature specifies what sequence it belongs to, rather than the feature specifying that directly itself. This enables a feature to exist on more than one sequence. The data we have is scaffolds and a genetic map. We use the map to order and orient the scaffolds. We also submit the scaffolds to our analysis pipeline which produces features on the scaffolds We store the scaffolds as SequencePieces, and the chromosome as a VirtualSequence. We would like our presentation layer, eg GBrowse, to be able to display the features on the chromosome as well as on the scaffolds, with correctly transformed locations. This means that we have to project the SequencePiece features onto the VirtualSequence. We have considered many alternative ways of doing this projection (Aaron and I and others). It is now clear to me that the most elegant and practical approach is to allow NAFeatures to have NALocations on more than one Sequence. Given that schema, we can add a final analysis step to our pipeline that easily does the projection by creating a new set of NALocations that attach the NAFeatures from the SequencePieces to the VirtualSequence. The downsides that I see to this approach are: 1. a change to the schema 2. in the case that a program wants to iterate across the features of a sequence without regard to their location, the query will have an additional join. i think this is probably a rare case. I would propose this as a feature enhancement to GUS Schema 3.6 Encouragments? Objections? thanks, steve |
From: Jian Lu <jl...@vb...> - 2005-08-16 19:35:10
|
Hi group, I downloaded Gene Ontology version 3.306 (component.ontology,function.ontology, process.ontology) and ran GUS::Supported::Plugin::InsertGeneOntology to load them into our GUS database. Here is my command: ga GUS::Supported::Plugin::InsertGeneOntology --filePath /home/data/ontology --functionExtDbName 'GO Function' --processExtDbName 'GO Process' --componentExtDbName 'GO Component' --commit Everything looks fine, no errors. It returned a result as "Created 19395 entries in GOTerm, 28145 entries in GORelationship, and 16375 entries in GOSynonym. Skipped 0 total entries". But when I was doing other data checking, I found there are three GO terms that have not been loaded, GO:009387, GO:0005331, GO:0009456. They do exist on the GO downloaded files. Has anyone used this plugin to load GO and checked its completeness? Please advise. Thanks. Jian |
From: steve <sfi...@pc...> - 2005-08-18 19:43:11
|
jian- yes, we have used the plugin, but it has been changed a little recently. can you do a grep on the file to count how many terms there are in it? have you looked carefully at those entries in the file to see if there is something that distinguishes them? can you count how many rows actually are in the database that were put there by that run of the plugin? thanks for your help, steve Jian Lu wrote: > Hi group, > > I downloaded Gene Ontology version 3.306 > (component.ontology,function.ontology, process.ontology) and ran > GUS::Supported::Plugin::InsertGeneOntology to load them into our GUS > database. > Here is my command: > > ga GUS::Supported::Plugin::InsertGeneOntology --filePath > /home/data/ontology --functionExtDbName 'GO Function' > --processExtDbName 'GO Process' --componentExtDbName 'GO Component' > --commit > > > Everything looks fine, no errors. It returned a result as "Created > 19395 entries in GOTerm, 28145 entries in GORelationship, and 16375 > entries in GOSynonym. Skipped 0 total entries". > > But when I was doing other data checking, I found there are three GO > terms that have not been loaded, GO:009387, GO:0005331, GO:0009456. > They do exist on the GO downloaded files. > Has anyone used this plugin to load GO and checked its completeness? > Please advise. Thanks. > > Jian > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO > September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle > Practices > Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing > & QA > Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf > _______________________________________________ > Gusdev-gusdev mailing list > Gus...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gusdev-gusdev |
From: Jian Lu <jl...@vb...> - 2005-08-18 17:58:29
Attachments:
GOTERM.total
|
Hi Steve, By further investigation of GO data, here is the report: Gene Ontology file info: !autogenerated-by: DAG-Edit version 1.419 rev 3 !saved-by: gocvs !date: Fri Aug 12 21:00:17 PDT 2005 !version: $Revision: 3.306 $ Total unique GO term in component.ontology: 1745 Total unique GO term in function.ontology: 7902 Total unique GO term in process.ontology: 10370 Total unique GO term in three files: 20015 (note: GO:0003673 exists in all three files) By comparing our database SRes.GOTERM Total loaded by GUS plugin: 19395 Surprisingly, there are 620 GO terms unloaded!!! I have attached a file which lists all unqiue GO terms from three original files with flag 'loaded' and 'missing'. Thanks. steve wrote: > jian- > > yes, we have used the plugin, but it has been changed a little > recently. can you do a grep on the file to count how many terms there > are in it? have you looked carefully at those entries in the file to > see if there is something that distinguishes them? can you count > how many rows actually are in the database that were put there by that > run of the plugin? > > thanks for your help, > steve > > Jian Lu wrote: > >> Hi group, >> >> I downloaded Gene Ontology version 3.306 >> (component.ontology,function.ontology, process.ontology) and ran >> GUS::Supported::Plugin::InsertGeneOntology to load them into our GUS >> database. >> Here is my command: >> >> ga GUS::Supported::Plugin::InsertGeneOntology --filePath >> /home/data/ontology --functionExtDbName 'GO Function' >> --processExtDbName 'GO Process' --componentExtDbName 'GO Component' >> --commit >> >> >> Everything looks fine, no errors. It returned a result as "Created >> 19395 entries in GOTerm, 28145 entries in GORelationship, and 16375 >> entries in GOSynonym. Skipped 0 total entries". >> >> But when I was doing other data checking, I found there are three GO >> terms that have not been loaded, GO:009387, GO:0005331, GO:0009456. >> They do exist on the GO downloaded files. >> Has anyone used this plugin to load GO and checked its completeness? >> Please advise. Thanks. >> >> Jian >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------- >> SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO >> September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle >> Practices >> Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing >> & QA >> Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * >> http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf >> _______________________________________________ >> Gusdev-gusdev mailing list >> Gus...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gusdev-gusdev > |
From: Jian Lu <jl...@vb...> - 2005-08-18 20:15:09
Attachments:
GOTERM.missing
|
Steve, After further investigation of GO files and comparison of the database, here is the report: GO file information: !autogenerated-by: DAG-Edit version 1.419 rev 3 !saved-by: gocvs !date: Fri Aug 12 21:00:17 PDT 2005 !version: $Revision: 3.306 $ unique GO terms in component.ontology: 1745 unique GO terms in function.ontology: 7902 unique GO terms in process.ontology: 10370 unique GO terms in all three files: 20015 total loaded GO terms: 19395 total missing GO terms: 620 steve wrote: > jian- > > yes, we have used the plugin, but it has been changed a little > recently. can you do a grep on the file to count how many terms there > are in it? have you looked carefully at those entries in the file to > see if there is something that distinguishes them? can you count > how many rows actually are in the database that were put there by that > run of the plugin? > > thanks for your help, > steve > > Jian Lu wrote: > >> Hi group, >> >> I downloaded Gene Ontology version 3.306 >> (component.ontology,function.ontology, process.ontology) and ran >> GUS::Supported::Plugin::InsertGeneOntology to load them into our GUS >> database. >> Here is my command: >> >> ga GUS::Supported::Plugin::InsertGeneOntology --filePath >> /home/data/ontology --functionExtDbName 'GO Function' >> --processExtDbName 'GO Process' --componentExtDbName 'GO Component' >> --commit >> >> >> Everything looks fine, no errors. It returned a result as "Created >> 19395 entries in GOTerm, 28145 entries in GORelationship, and 16375 >> entries in GOSynonym. Skipped 0 total entries". >> >> But when I was doing other data checking, I found there are three GO >> terms that have not been loaded, GO:009387, GO:0005331, GO:0009456. >> They do exist on the GO downloaded files. >> Has anyone used this plugin to load GO and checked its completeness? >> Please advise. Thanks. >> >> Jian >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------- >> SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO >> September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle >> Practices >> Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing >> & QA >> Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * >> http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf >> _______________________________________________ >> Gusdev-gusdev mailing list >> Gus...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gusdev-gusdev > |
From: <jld...@se...> - 2005-08-18 21:25:44
|
I'm looking into the issue, and will let you know what I find as soon as possible. Jennifer Quoting Jian Lu <jl...@vb...>: > Steve, > > After further investigation of GO files and comparison of the database, > here is the report: > > GO file information: > !autogenerated-by: DAG-Edit version 1.419 rev 3 > !saved-by: gocvs > !date: Fri Aug 12 21:00:17 PDT 2005 > !version: $Revision: 3.306 $ > > unique GO terms in component.ontology: 1745 > unique GO terms in function.ontology: 7902 > unique GO terms in process.ontology: 10370 > unique GO terms in all three files: 20015 > > total loaded GO terms: 19395 > total missing GO terms: 620 > > > steve wrote: > > > jian- > > > > yes, we have used the plugin, but it has been changed a little > > recently. can you do a grep on the file to count how many terms there > > are in it? have you looked carefully at those entries in the file to > > see if there is something that distinguishes them? can you count > > how many rows actually are in the database that were put there by that > > run of the plugin? > > > > thanks for your help, > > steve > > > > Jian Lu wrote: > > > >> Hi group, > >> > >> I downloaded Gene Ontology version 3.306 > >> (component.ontology,function.ontology, process.ontology) and ran > >> GUS::Supported::Plugin::InsertGeneOntology to load them into our GUS > >> database. > >> Here is my command: > >> > >> ga GUS::Supported::Plugin::InsertGeneOntology --filePath > >> /home/data/ontology --functionExtDbName 'GO Function' > >> --processExtDbName 'GO Process' --componentExtDbName 'GO Component' > >> --commit > >> > >> > >> Everything looks fine, no errors. It returned a result as "Created > >> 19395 entries in GOTerm, 28145 entries in GORelationship, and 16375 > >> entries in GOSynonym. Skipped 0 total entries". > >> > >> But when I was doing other data checking, I found there are three GO > >> terms that have not been loaded, GO:009387, GO:0005331, GO:0009456. > >> They do exist on the GO downloaded files. > >> Has anyone used this plugin to load GO and checked its completeness? > >> Please advise. Thanks. > >> > >> Jian > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> ------------------------------------------------------- > >> SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO > >> September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle > >> Practices > >> Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing > >> & QA > >> Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * > >> http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Gusdev-gusdev mailing list > >> Gus...@li... > >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gusdev-gusdev > > > > |
From: Michael S. <msa...@pc...> - 2005-08-18 22:22:22
|
Has a bug been filed for this? If not, please do so. --Mike On 8/18/05 5:25 PM, "jld...@se..." <jld...@se...> wrote: > I'm looking into the issue, and will let you know what I find as soon as > possible. > > Jennifer > > Quoting Jian Lu <jl...@vb...>: > >> Steve, >> >> After further investigation of GO files and comparison of the database, >> here is the report: >> >> GO file information: >> !autogenerated-by: DAG-Edit version 1.419 rev 3 >> !saved-by: gocvs >> !date: Fri Aug 12 21:00:17 PDT 2005 >> !version: $Revision: 3.306 $ >> >> unique GO terms in component.ontology: 1745 >> unique GO terms in function.ontology: 7902 >> unique GO terms in process.ontology: 10370 >> unique GO terms in all three files: 20015 >> >> total loaded GO terms: 19395 >> total missing GO terms: 620 >> >> >> steve wrote: >> >>> jian- >>> >>> yes, we have used the plugin, but it has been changed a little >>> recently. can you do a grep on the file to count how many terms there >>> are in it? have you looked carefully at those entries in the file to >>> see if there is something that distinguishes them? can you count >>> how many rows actually are in the database that were put there by that >>> run of the plugin? >>> >>> thanks for your help, >>> steve >>> >>> Jian Lu wrote: >>> >>>> Hi group, >>>> >>>> I downloaded Gene Ontology version 3.306 >>>> (component.ontology,function.ontology, process.ontology) and ran >>>> GUS::Supported::Plugin::InsertGeneOntology to load them into our GUS >>>> database. >>>> Here is my command: >>>> >>>> ga GUS::Supported::Plugin::InsertGeneOntology --filePath >>>> /home/data/ontology --functionExtDbName 'GO Function' >>>> --processExtDbName 'GO Process' --componentExtDbName 'GO Component' >>>> --commit >>>> >>>> >>>> Everything looks fine, no errors. It returned a result as "Created >>>> 19395 entries in GOTerm, 28145 entries in GORelationship, and 16375 >>>> entries in GOSynonym. Skipped 0 total entries". >>>> >>>> But when I was doing other data checking, I found there are three GO >>>> terms that have not been loaded, GO:009387, GO:0005331, GO:0009456. >>>> They do exist on the GO downloaded files. >>>> Has anyone used this plugin to load GO and checked its completeness? >>>> Please advise. Thanks. >>>> >>>> Jian >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------- >>>> SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO >>>> September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle >>>> Practices >>>> Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing >>>> & QA >>>> Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * >>>> http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Gusdev-gusdev mailing list >>>> Gus...@li... >>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gusdev-gusdev >>> >> >> > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO > September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices > Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing & QA > Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf > _______________________________________________ > Gusdev-gusdev mailing list > Gus...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gusdev-gusdev |
From: Michael S. <msa...@pc...> - 2005-08-18 22:25:42
|
Has a bug been filed for this? If not, please do so. --Mike On 8/18/05 5:25 PM, "jld...@se..." <jld...@se...> wrote: > I'm looking into the issue, and will let you know what I find as soon as > possible. > > Jennifer > > Quoting Jian Lu <jl...@vb...>: > >> Steve, >> >> After further investigation of GO files and comparison of the database, >> here is the report: >> >> GO file information: >> !autogenerated-by: DAG-Edit version 1.419 rev 3 >> !saved-by: gocvs >> !date: Fri Aug 12 21:00:17 PDT 2005 >> !version: $Revision: 3.306 $ >> >> unique GO terms in component.ontology: 1745 >> unique GO terms in function.ontology: 7902 >> unique GO terms in process.ontology: 10370 >> unique GO terms in all three files: 20015 >> >> total loaded GO terms: 19395 >> total missing GO terms: 620 >> >> >> steve wrote: >> >>> jian- >>> >>> yes, we have used the plugin, but it has been changed a little >>> recently. can you do a grep on the file to count how many terms there >>> are in it? have you looked carefully at those entries in the file to >>> see if there is something that distinguishes them? can you count >>> how many rows actually are in the database that were put there by that >>> run of the plugin? >>> >>> thanks for your help, >>> steve >>> >>> Jian Lu wrote: >>> >>>> Hi group, >>>> >>>> I downloaded Gene Ontology version 3.306 >>>> (component.ontology,function.ontology, process.ontology) and ran >>>> GUS::Supported::Plugin::InsertGeneOntology to load them into our GUS >>>> database. >>>> Here is my command: >>>> >>>> ga GUS::Supported::Plugin::InsertGeneOntology --filePath >>>> /home/data/ontology --functionExtDbName 'GO Function' >>>> --processExtDbName 'GO Process' --componentExtDbName 'GO Component' >>>> --commit >>>> >>>> >>>> Everything looks fine, no errors. It returned a result as "Created >>>> 19395 entries in GOTerm, 28145 entries in GORelationship, and 16375 >>>> entries in GOSynonym. Skipped 0 total entries". >>>> >>>> But when I was doing other data checking, I found there are three GO >>>> terms that have not been loaded, GO:009387, GO:0005331, GO:0009456. >>>> They do exist on the GO downloaded files. >>>> Has anyone used this plugin to load GO and checked its completeness? >>>> Please advise. Thanks. >>>> >>>> Jian >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------- >>>> SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO >>>> September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle >>>> Practices >>>> Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing >>>> & QA >>>> Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * >>>> http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Gusdev-gusdev mailing list >>>> Gus...@li... >>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gusdev-gusdev >>> >> >> > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO > September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices > Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing & QA > Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf > _______________________________________________ > Gusdev-gusdev mailing list > Gus...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gusdev-gusdev |
From: steve <sfi...@pc...> - 2005-08-19 15:35:53
|
a quick report on the status of this. jennifer made progress, being able to reproduce the problem here at cbil. today is a vacation day for her, so i expect she'll be able to make more progress on monday. steve jld...@se... wrote: >I'm looking into the issue, and will let you know what I find as soon as possible. > >Jennifer > >Quoting Jian Lu <jl...@vb...>: > > > >>Steve, >> >>After further investigation of GO files and comparison of the database, >>here is the report: >> >>GO file information: >>!autogenerated-by: DAG-Edit version 1.419 rev 3 >>!saved-by: gocvs >>!date: Fri Aug 12 21:00:17 PDT 2005 >>!version: $Revision: 3.306 $ >> >>unique GO terms in component.ontology: 1745 >>unique GO terms in function.ontology: 7902 >>unique GO terms in process.ontology: 10370 >>unique GO terms in all three files: 20015 >> >>total loaded GO terms: 19395 >>total missing GO terms: 620 >> >> >>steve wrote: >> >> >> >>>jian- >>> >>>yes, we have used the plugin, but it has been changed a little >>>recently. can you do a grep on the file to count how many terms there >>>are in it? have you looked carefully at those entries in the file to >>>see if there is something that distinguishes them? can you count >>>how many rows actually are in the database that were put there by that >>>run of the plugin? >>> >>>thanks for your help, >>>steve >>> >>>Jian Lu wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>>Hi group, >>>> >>>>I downloaded Gene Ontology version 3.306 >>>>(component.ontology,function.ontology, process.ontology) and ran >>>>GUS::Supported::Plugin::InsertGeneOntology to load them into our GUS >>>>database. >>>>Here is my command: >>>> >>>>ga GUS::Supported::Plugin::InsertGeneOntology --filePath >>>>/home/data/ontology --functionExtDbName 'GO Function' >>>>--processExtDbName 'GO Process' --componentExtDbName 'GO Component' >>>>--commit >>>> >>>> >>>>Everything looks fine, no errors. It returned a result as "Created >>>>19395 entries in GOTerm, 28145 entries in GORelationship, and 16375 >>>>entries in GOSynonym. Skipped 0 total entries". >>>> >>>>But when I was doing other data checking, I found there are three GO >>>>terms that have not been loaded, GO:009387, GO:0005331, GO:0009456. >>>>They do exist on the GO downloaded files. >>>>Has anyone used this plugin to load GO and checked its completeness? >>>>Please advise. Thanks. >>>> >>>>Jian >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>------------------------------------------------------- >>>>SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO >>>>September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle >>>>Practices >>>>Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing >>>>& QA >>>>Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * >>>>http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf >>>>_______________________________________________ >>>>Gusdev-gusdev mailing list >>>>Gus...@li... >>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gusdev-gusdev >>>> >>>> >> >> > > > > >------------------------------------------------------- >SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO >September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices >Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing & QA >Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf >_______________________________________________ >Gusdev-gusdev mailing list >Gus...@li... >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gusdev-gusdev > > |
From: <jld...@se...> - 2005-09-16 20:54:51
|
Jian, I beleive that the behavior we are observing is actually a designed behavior. The pattern that I observed in my last email indicated that everything that was missing from the SRes.GOTerm table was a secondary identifier. After further investigation we noticed that secondary identifiers are stored in the SRes.GOSynonym table as source_ids. Please let us know if this resolves your problem, or if you encounter any further issues when dealing with the plugin. Jennifer Quoting Jian Lu <jl...@vb...>: > Steve, > > After further investigation of GO files and comparison of the database, > here is the report: > > GO file information: > !autogenerated-by: DAG-Edit version 1.419 rev 3 > !saved-by: gocvs > !date: Fri Aug 12 21:00:17 PDT 2005 > !version: $Revision: 3.306 $ > > unique GO terms in component.ontology: 1745 > unique GO terms in function.ontology: 7902 > unique GO terms in process.ontology: 10370 > unique GO terms in all three files: 20015 > > total loaded GO terms: 19395 > total missing GO terms: 620 > > > steve wrote: > > > jian- > > > > yes, we have used the plugin, but it has been changed a little > > recently. can you do a grep on the file to count how many terms there > > are in it? have you looked carefully at those entries in the file to > > see if there is something that distinguishes them? can you count > > how many rows actually are in the database that were put there by that > > run of the plugin? > > > > thanks for your help, > > steve > > > > Jian Lu wrote: > > > >> Hi group, > >> > >> I downloaded Gene Ontology version 3.306 > >> (component.ontology,function.ontology, process.ontology) and ran > >> GUS::Supported::Plugin::InsertGeneOntology to load them into our GUS > >> database. > >> Here is my command: > >> > >> ga GUS::Supported::Plugin::InsertGeneOntology --filePath > >> /home/data/ontology --functionExtDbName 'GO Function' > >> --processExtDbName 'GO Process' --componentExtDbName 'GO Component' > >> --commit > >> > >> > >> Everything looks fine, no errors. It returned a result as "Created > >> 19395 entries in GOTerm, 28145 entries in GORelationship, and 16375 > >> entries in GOSynonym. Skipped 0 total entries". > >> > >> But when I was doing other data checking, I found there are three GO > >> terms that have not been loaded, GO:009387, GO:0005331, GO:0009456. > >> They do exist on the GO downloaded files. > >> Has anyone used this plugin to load GO and checked its completeness? > >> Please advise. Thanks. > >> > >> Jian > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> ------------------------------------------------------- > >> SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO > >> September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle > >> Practices > >> Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing > >> & QA > >> Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * > >> http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Gusdev-gusdev mailing list > >> Gus...@li... > >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gusdev-gusdev > > > > |
From: Jian Lu <jl...@vb...> - 2005-09-16 21:59:45
|
Hi Jennifer, That makes sense now. It really helps understand this plugin. However, I have a new question, why the plugin loads so many empty records on SRes.GOSynonym while loading those secondary identifiers? Thank you very much. Jian jld...@se... wrote: >Jian, > >I beleive that the behavior we are observing is actually a designed behavior. >The pattern that I observed in my last email indicated that everything that was >missing from the SRes.GOTerm table was a secondary identifier. After further >investigation we noticed that secondary identifiers are stored in the >SRes.GOSynonym table as source_ids. > >Please let us know if this resolves your problem, or if you encounter any >further issues when dealing with the plugin. > > >Jennifer > >Quoting Jian Lu <jl...@vb...>: > > > >>Steve, >> >>After further investigation of GO files and comparison of the database, >>here is the report: >> >>GO file information: >>!autogenerated-by: DAG-Edit version 1.419 rev 3 >>!saved-by: gocvs >>!date: Fri Aug 12 21:00:17 PDT 2005 >>!version: $Revision: 3.306 $ >> >>unique GO terms in component.ontology: 1745 >>unique GO terms in function.ontology: 7902 >>unique GO terms in process.ontology: 10370 >>unique GO terms in all three files: 20015 >> >>total loaded GO terms: 19395 >>total missing GO terms: 620 >> >> >>steve wrote: >> >> >> >>>jian- >>> >>>yes, we have used the plugin, but it has been changed a little >>>recently. can you do a grep on the file to count how many terms there >>>are in it? have you looked carefully at those entries in the file to >>>see if there is something that distinguishes them? can you count >>>how many rows actually are in the database that were put there by that >>>run of the plugin? >>> >>>thanks for your help, >>>steve >>> >>>Jian Lu wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>>Hi group, >>>> >>>>I downloaded Gene Ontology version 3.306 >>>>(component.ontology,function.ontology, process.ontology) and ran >>>>GUS::Supported::Plugin::InsertGeneOntology to load them into our GUS >>>>database. >>>>Here is my command: >>>> >>>>ga GUS::Supported::Plugin::InsertGeneOntology --filePath >>>>/home/data/ontology --functionExtDbName 'GO Function' >>>>--processExtDbName 'GO Process' --componentExtDbName 'GO Component' >>>>--commit >>>> >>>> >>>>Everything looks fine, no errors. It returned a result as "Created >>>>19395 entries in GOTerm, 28145 entries in GORelationship, and 16375 >>>>entries in GOSynonym. Skipped 0 total entries". >>>> >>>>But when I was doing other data checking, I found there are three GO >>>>terms that have not been loaded, GO:009387, GO:0005331, GO:0009456. >>>>They do exist on the GO downloaded files. >>>>Has anyone used this plugin to load GO and checked its completeness? >>>>Please advise. Thanks. >>>> >>>>Jian >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>------------------------------------------------------- >>>>SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO >>>>September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle >>>>Practices >>>>Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing >>>>& QA >>>>Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * >>>>http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf >>>>_______________________________________________ >>>>Gusdev-gusdev mailing list >>>>Gus...@li... >>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gusdev-gusdev >>>> >>>> >> >> > > > > >------------------------------------------------------- >SF.Net email is sponsored by: >Tame your development challenges with Apache's Geronimo App Server. >Download it for free - -and be entered to win a 42" plasma tv or your very >own Sony(tm)PSP. Click here to play: http://sourceforge.net/geronimo.php >_______________________________________________ >Gusdev-gusdev mailing list >Gus...@li... >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gusdev-gusdev > > |