'Ccl integrate'
nb-geometry
Gamma is missing.
The systematic way would be to have different subtables for bi- and nb- geometries
For bi- 2theta, om, chi,phi
For nb - gamma, om, nu
*Created by: zaharko*
'Ccl integrate'
nb-geometry
Gamma is missing.
The systematic way would be to have different subtables for bi- and nb- geometries
For bi- 2theta, om, chi,phi
For nb - gamma, om, nu
<img width="1630" alt="ccl_integrate_nb_20211532" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/50512596/140739704-b4ddb41a-1a1e-4004-9147-f94d17cb54d3.png">
Ok, splitting all scans into 2 tables based on their geometries sounds like an option. The only tradeoff I see is that if all scans are of the same geometry, the second table will just occupy space. Though, maybe it's also helpful to know there are only one geometry scans. Which option would you prefer?
*Created by: ivan-usov*
Based on 1.1 in https://github.com/paulscherrerinstitute/pyzebra/issues/41 it was `2theta` for both, bi- and nb-geometries.
But I can add a new column `gamma` to fix the current issue.
Ok, splitting all scans into 2 tables based on their geometries sounds like an option. The only tradeoff I see is that if all scans are of the same geometry, the second table will just occupy space. Though, maybe it's also helpful to know there are only one geometry scans. Which option would you prefer?
Splitting the table might be more difficult than expected. Maybe I'll return to it later if you still think it significantly improves UX.
*Created by: ivan-usov*
Splitting the table might be more difficult than expected. Maybe I'll return to it later if you still think it significantly improves UX.
Blocking a user prevents them from interacting with repositories, such as opening or commenting on pull requests or issues. Learn more about blocking a user.
Created by: zaharko
'Ccl integrate'

nb-geometry
Gamma is missing.
The systematic way would be to have different subtables for bi- and nb- geometries
For bi- 2theta, om, chi,phi
For nb - gamma, om, nu
Created by: ivan-usov
Based on 1.1 in https://github.com/paulscherrerinstitute/pyzebra/issues/41 it was
2thetafor both, bi- and nb-geometries.But I can add a new column
gammato fix the current issue.Ok, splitting all scans into 2 tables based on their geometries sounds like an option. The only tradeoff I see is that if all scans are of the same geometry, the second table will just occupy space. Though, maybe it's also helpful to know there are only one geometry scans. Which option would you prefer?
Created by: ivan-usov
Splitting the table might be more difficult than expected. Maybe I'll return to it later if you still think it significantly improves UX.