You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
Repository navigation
geotiff: cross-library accuracy test (rasterio vs xarray-spatial vs zarr round-trip) #1961
Write the xarray-spatial DataArray with .to_zarr(...), reopen with xr.open_zarr(...).
Pairwise checks across the three readers:
pixel values (array_equal for integer dtypes, allclose with a documented tolerance for floats)
shape, dtype, nodata sentinel
x and y coordinate arrays within float tolerance
CRS WKT after normalising through _resolve_crs_to_wkt
affine transform (origin, pixel size) within 1e-9 relative
Why
The project already has backend-parity tests inside its own implementation (numpy / cupy / dask / dask+cupy). What's missing is a test that pins the GeoTIFF reader against an external reference (rasterio) and against a round-trip through a different on-disk format (Zarr). A regression in header parsing, georef extraction, coord generation, nodata handling, or Zarr metadata propagation can pass every existing test and only surface when a user files a bug.
Suggested inputs
Cover the cases that have drifted before:
single-band float32 with a non-NaN nodata sentinel
multi-band uint16 with per-band nodata
north-up and south-up rasters (negative vs positive pixel_height)
Activity
geotiff: add cross-library parity test (rasterio + zarr round-trip) (#…
geotiff: add cross-library parity test (rasterio + zarr round-trip) (#…
geotiff: cross-library accuracy test (rasterio vs xrspatial vs zarr) (#…
geotiff tests: consolidate parity tail cluster (Sub-PR B) (#2462)