[Bioperl-l] Bio::Tools::Run::RemoteBlast return codes

[Scott Markel]

Mark,

Thank you.

Scott


-----Original Message-----
From: Mark A. Jensen [mailto:maj at fortinbras.us] 
Sent: Friday, 15 January 2010 8:10 AM
To: Scott Markel; Chris Fields
Cc: Bioperl-l at lists.open-bio.org
Subject: Re: [Bioperl-l] Bio::Tools::Run::RemoteBlast return codes

can do Scott-- cheers MAJ
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Scott Markel" <SMarkel at accelrys.com>
To: "Chris Fields" <cjfields at illinois.edu>
Cc: <Bioperl-l at lists.open-bio.org>
Sent: Friday, January 15, 2010 10:40 AM
Subject: Re: [Bioperl-l] Bio::Tools::Run::RemoteBlast return codes


> Chris,
>
> It was nice meeting you and Scott C., too.  And seeing Jason again.
>
> If you and Mark
>
>> How about returning 1, 2, 4 for the non-zero cases, with some
>> error constants set for convenience? MAJ
>
> are okay with adding more return values, that works best for us in
> Pipeline Pilot.
>
> I'll add a Bugzilla entry.
>
> Scott
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Fields [mailto:cjfields at illinois.edu]
> Sent: Thursday, 14 January 2010 10:34 PM
> To: Scott Markel
> Cc: Bioperl-l at lists.open-bio.org
> Subject: Re: [Bioperl-l] Bio::Tools::Run::RemoteBlast return codes
>
> Scott,
>
> I think this is fine (to change the third condition and retry with a specific 
> code).  The other possibility is to simply throw different exceptions under 
> each of these circumstances, which can be caught via eval to allow a retry 
> under only certain conditions (no content, for instance).
>
> One interesting bit: I think (though I'm not sure) the new BLAST+ allows 
> remote BLAST queries from command line, similar to the legacy blastcl3.  Mark 
> just wrote up a BLAST+ wrapper, so it might be worth testing that theory out.
>
> chris
>
> PS - BTW, nice to finally meet you at GMOD!
>
> On Jan 14, 2010, at 4:58 PM, Scott Markel wrote:
>
>> We've been looking at Bio::Tools::Run::RemoteBlast after some feedback
>> from our customers.  Due to network irregularities (not sure what else
>> to call it) users see the getting of remote BLAST results as somewhat
>> random.  When results come back the hits are fine, but sometimes no
>> information comes back at all.  Retrying helps.
>>
>> In looking at RemoteBlast.pm there are four "return -1" cases.
>>
>> * $status eq 'ERROR'      (return on line 614)
>> * $line =~ /ERROR/I       (return on line 628)
>> * !$got_content           (return on line 648)
>> * !$response->is_success  (return on line 655)
>>
>> In the case of no content we'd like to retry remote BLAST.  We're happy
>> to do that part in our Pipeline Pilot Perl code wrapper for the BioPerl
>> module, but we only want to retry in that case, not the other three.
>>
>> What would happen if that third "return -1" changed to a different
>> return value?
>>
>> Scott
>>
>> Scott Markel, Ph.D.
>> Principal Bioinformatics Architect  email:  smarkel at accelrys.com
>> Accelrys (Pipeline Pilot R&D)       mobile: +1 858 205 3653
>> 10188 Telesis Court, Suite 100      voice:  +1 858 799 5603
>> San Diego, CA 92121                 fax:    +1 858 799 5222
>> USA                                 web:    http://www.accelrys.com
>>
>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/smarkel
>> Vice President, Board of Directors:
>>    International Society for Computational Biology
>> Chair: ISCB Publications Committee
>> Associate Editor: PLoS Computational Biology
>> Editorial Board: Briefings in Bioinformatics
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bioperl-l mailing list
>> Bioperl-l at lists.open-bio.org
>> http://lists.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/bioperl-l
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bioperl-l mailing list
> Bioperl-l at lists.open-bio.org
> http://lists.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/bioperl-l
>