-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 119
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
3243 PHMSA transmission part J #3266
Conversation
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've been using onshore_type_a
rather than onshore_a
, so we should pick one to be consistent (there will definitely be one last clean up PR, if we just want to make note of it in an issue I'm ok with that too). Otherwise all looks good here.
I'll make it |
54df7a7
to
486335d
Compare
486335d
to
5df0503
Compare
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #3266 +/- ##
=======================================
- Coverage 92.7% 92.7% -0.0%
=======================================
Files 144 144
Lines 13091 13091
=======================================
- Hits 12135 12134 -1
- Misses 956 957 +1 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
5df0503
to
af68e0a
Compare
… doesn't exist before 2001
Overview
Closes #3243.
yearly_miles_of_pipe_by_decade
tofile_map
,page_map
,page_part_map
,skiprows
,skipfooter
raw_phmsagas__yearly_miles_of_pipe_by_decade
asset to ETLTesting
How did you make sure this worked? How can a reviewer verify this?
I ran the ETL, then ran:
And looked at some of the data:
The spike in gathering miles in 2022 appears to be due to "Onshore Type C" pipes finally getting reported starting in 2022:
Not sure if there's any specific tests I should write about the raw data.
To-do list