![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Mike Nolan a écrit :
We're trying to data formats a new spectral instrument. It will produce binary tables in a vaguely SDFITS-like format, with a table column that contains a data array. The array will have multiple axes: time, frequency, polarization, etc., usually with only the frequency axis being nondegenerate, with table rows generated (say) once per second. At moderate data rates, the header information changes slowly compared to the spectral dump rate, and the time axis may become nondegenerate within a record. However, at the highest data rates packed binary data (say 2 bits per sample) will have to be stored, and we're trying to figure out how to best describe those in a way consistent with "principle of least astonishment". Do others have experience or suggestions with this? If you need that functionality, and as long as you can live with integer number of bits per sample, I'd say that using BITPIX=2, 3, 4 is probably the least disruptive path. It certainly isn't standard (at least for now ;-)), but well written readers will hopefully have graceful failures on that construct, and the intent should be reasonably clear to all (modulo the signed/unsigned ambiguity). Setting SIMPLE = F would perhaps be a good idea, though ;-). If you'd also need to store 1.5 bit per sample (3 level sampling) and the like, then I'd have no useful suggestion... |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
[fitsbits] Packed binary values | Mike Nolan | FITS | 0 | April 27th 07 04:42 PM |
Power-packed results? | roberts | Policy | 5 | April 3rd 05 02:56 AM |
Power-packed results? | roberts | Policy | 0 | March 24th 05 12:40 PM |
[fitsbits] FITS Binary Table Proposals | William Pence | FITS | 5 | November 23rd 04 08:54 PM |
[fitsbits] Start of Public Comment Period on FITS Binary TableProposals | William Pence | FITS | 2 | October 19th 04 02:31 PM |