-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 120
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
Add BA codes and EIA sector IDs to EIA-860M changelog table #3442
Conversation
* Add type hints and revise docstring for eia860m extract function * Rename EIA consolidated sector appropriate in eia860m column mappings * Add balancing_authority_code_eia and sector_id_eia to the core_eia860m__changelog_generators table. This required translating the categorical strings used in the EIA-860M to identify sectors to the canonical IDs that are associated with the sectors, defined in core_eia__codes_sector_consolidated. * Add an alembic schema migration to acommodate the new fields. * Re-lock conda depdencies to avoid yanked pytest 8.1.0 version. Closes #3437
7114a23
to
d626689
Compare
It turns out that the BA codes in this table are a mess. Cleaning them up now. |
* Add new coding fixes to map non-standard BA codes to canonical values. * This includes a manual fix to PacifiCorp, since whether PA becomes PACW or PACE depends on what state we're looking at (OR vs. UT). * Run the standard encoding on the table to apply most of these fixes.
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.
this looks good to me. nits but nothing is blocking.
docs/release_notes.rst
Outdated
:ref:`core_eia860m__changelog_generators` table. This required some cleanup of the BA | ||
codes, which were not standardized. See issue :issue:`3437` and PR :pr:`3442`. |
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.
do you mean that the BA codes in 860m were not standardized in this table? If so i'm not sure that addition is super helpful in release notes because its not like they existed in the table beforehand. totally a nit and not a hill i will die on.
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.
I meant that the BA codes in the original EIA860M were not standardized. They were significantly messier than the BA codes reported elsewhere. Like there were as many new funky codes in just this one table as we had collected from all the other tables.
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.
I'll clarify the note.
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.
the clarification is nice! i still don't think this is a helpful release note (if we had been including this column but not encoding it and then transitioned to doing the cleanup then i think it would make more sense). but again not a hill i will die on.
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.
@zaneselvans sorry i hit approve before bc i forgot there is one real request in here in the column maps.
Overview
Closes #3437
Testing
make pytest-coverage
locallyTo-do list