-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 9
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
1.1.0 Updates #42
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
1.1.0 Updates #42
Conversation
Updating dev versions to 1.1.0dev
…all na values are correctly set to 0
1.1.0 Updates
…run on just the genome, jsut the transcriptome, or both
Add in oarfish as additional quantification method
|
@atrull314 : one thing I did just now catch is that we should disable |
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.
Solid release, but I found some minor technical issues. I've also added some ideas to consider, feel free to argue with these.
ext.args = { | ||
[ | ||
"--threads 30", | ||
params.barcode_format == "10X_3v3" ? "--kit-version 3v3" : params.barcode_format == "10X_5v2" ? "--kit-version 5v2" : "" |
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.
Is this information not required anymore?
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.
Correct, we had modified the blaze module to base threads off task.cpus
as is the case with other modules, which resulted in this piece of the documentation being invalidated. This specific change was to resolve an error in documentation that we had put in before the change to the blaze module.
modules/local/merge_mtx.nf
Outdated
task.ext.when == null || task.ext.when | ||
|
||
script: | ||
def args = task.ext.args ?: '' |
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.
Align equal signs
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.
Should be resolved with commit 57258d7
"${task.process}": | ||
python: \$(python --version | sed 's/Python //g') | ||
END_VERSIONS | ||
""" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Consider adding a stub, might be handy later
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should be resolved with commit 57258d7
"${task.process}": | ||
oarfish: \$(oarfish --version | sed 's#oarfish ##g') | ||
END_VERSIONS | ||
""" |
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.
Comments as in MTX_MERGE
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.
Should be resolved with commit 57258d7
def args = task.ext.args ?: '' | ||
|
||
""" | ||
awk '/^>/{chrom=(split(substr(\$0,2), a, " ")); filename=( a[1] ".split.fa"); print > filename; next}{print >> filename}' $fasta |
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.
Does this have to be a new module? Looks like the same result could be achieved with the gawk
nf-core module
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.
So the issue is the gawk
nf-core module outputs as a single file, this awk statement is splitting a fasta into all of the chromosomes that compose it, so we need all the individual chromosome fastas as outputs. I'm not sure the module currently supports this behavior
|
||
ch_gene_qc_stats = Channel.empty() | ||
ch_transcript_qc_stats = Channel.empty() | ||
if (quantifier.equals("oarfish")) { |
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.
Is the "both" option handled correctly here?
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.
Yep! Its handled in a separate file to make sure they are able to run in parallel.
ch_transcript_qc_stats = QUANTIFY_SCRNA_ISOQUANT.out.transcript_qc_stats | ||
} | ||
|
||
emit: |
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.
Harshil alignment
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.
Should be resolved with commit 6c6e7ec
// | ||
// MODULE: Samtools Merge | ||
// | ||
SAMTOOLS_MERGE ( |
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.
Versions from this one?
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.
Should be resolved with commit 67d0ab3
// | ||
// MODULE: Samtools Index | ||
// | ||
SAMTOOLS_INDEX_MERGED( ch_dedup_single_bam ) |
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.
And 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.
Should be resolved with commit 67d0ab3
validate_params, | ||
"nextflow_schema.json" | ||
null |
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.
Is this null correct?
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 think this may have been a merge issue, but should be resolved with commit 9951f69
@itrujnara I think I have resolved all your points, please resolve them as you see fit or we can discuss alternative solutions. Thanks! |
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 see all the comments have been addressed, so good to go from my side. Good job!
params.skip_bam_nanocomp, | ||
params.skip_seurat, | ||
false, | ||
false |
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.
Disabling splitting the BAM in the transcriptomic data is currently creating a bottleneck at this step in regards to run time (BAM deduplication). This was originally solved in the genome mapping by splitting the BAM by chromosome, but due to the nature of the transcriptomic mappings, this cannot be enabled at this step as is.
@atrull314 and I are currently evaluating different approaches to implementing this optimization (or an alternative method), and once we have updated this portion of the workflow, the PR can move forward.
Hi @itrujnara, As @lianov mentioned we actually ended up finding an issue while we were performing validation of results that resulted in increased runtimes for our deduplication steps. I've kept the PR with the new changes so its easier to review, its available here #43. If you wouldn't mind taking a look when you have a chance. Thanks, |
@itrujnara : yes just adding a note here, that I the PR #43 is now approved but that we have not merged into dev yet as reviewing any other changes in that PR would likely be easier. It is all good from my end, and once it makes it to the dev branch and I can approve this one. |
Hi @itrujnara, Just wanted to reach out again and ask if you wouldn't mind taking a look at PR #43 for the review. Thanks, |
PR Checklist
This PR contains the following updates for v1.1.0 of the pipeline: