HI Greg Thanks for a quick reply and making some requested changes. However I am not still sure if importing NGS data will help in long run. For Centers generating NGS data which could 2-3 T.B / week depending on no. of sequencers I think importing another copy of raw data into galaxy workspace will be asking for lot of disk space. I understand it is a neat way of doing things as it becomes agnostic of the raw data location but might not be the best way for handling huge data in long run for centers like ours. Please correct me if I am wrong. I think we could also have a simple option without having to import the data and just using it for analysis from the current location, also storing results at the same location. That way in future even if the data set is moved analysis also stays with it. Let me know what you feel. I will be happy to know if there are any other smart reasons of importing the data in galaxy workspace just for curiosity sake. Thanks, -Abhi On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 9:28 AM, Greg Von Kuster <ghv2@psu.edu> wrote:
Hello Abhishek,
The Galaxy distribution includes the enhancements to which I previously referred for uploading history files. Uploading files to a history now creates a Galaxy job just like any other tool, and can be run on a cluster node, allowing upload of very large files. The initial pass of this work is also completed for uploading to a Data Library, but this enhancement is still in test, so it should soon be available in the distribution.
Do you want to avoid having to import at all (e.g. allow Galaxy to refer to datasets that live in their original locations)? This is not currently possible, but if this is what you are looking for, we can consider some additional options on the current upload form, or possibly a new, separate form.
Greg Von Kuster Galaxy Development Team
Abhishek Pratap wrote:
Hi Greg, Anton and all
Just wondering if there has been any progress made on this end. I am sorry I was not able to follow it up on Assaf's suggestion due to other things at work.
I did try the latest version of galaxy and looks like the files are still transferred over HTTP before they could be used in the galaxy workspace. Also I would again like to highlight that many labs might want to use the local instance of galaxy and prefer to point to a local path where the file is being stored. That way we will have both the benefits of using a cool GUI and process data stored locally.
Let me know if you guys need some feedback or have more questions. I will be happy to discuss them.
best, -Abhi
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 4:26 PM, Greg Von Kuster <ghv2@psu.edu <mailto: ghv2@psu.edu>> wrote:
Hello Abishek,
We are currently in the process of significantly enhancing the current Galaxy upload utilities, and the new version should eliminate the issue you've raised about the time needed to upload large files via HTTP ( not for making an initial copy of the file in the Galaxy environment ). However, it will probably not be ready for release for a few more weeks, so if you can take advantage of Assaf's script in the meantime, that's great.  I can't guarantee that all Galaxy features will function correctly if you do this though.
Assaf, have you found that using your script breaks anything?
Also, if you upload a file to a library rather than a history, multiple users can "import" the library dataset into their history for analysis, but there is only 1 file on disk ( users are pointing to it from their histories ).  But uploading a file to a history will create a new copy of the file each time it is uploaded.
Greg Von Kuster Galaxy Development Team
Abhishek Pratap wrote:
Hi All
@Greg : Please find my comments below.
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 10:44 AM, Greg Von Kuster<ghv2@psu.edu <mailto:ghv2@psu.edu>> wrote:
Hello Abhi,
Can you clarify the steps you took that produced the behavior? †See my comments below.
Anton Nekrutenko wrote:
Abhishek:
Let talk. This is the area of active current development. We are †looking at implementing a universal fastq-like format or supporting †multiple formats. Perhaps we should join efforts in ironing out †specifications.
anton galaxy team
On Jul 20, 2009, at 5:18 PM, Abhishek Pratap wrote:
Hi All
I recently came to know about NGS analysis on galaxy during ISMB. Getting excited I tried couple of things basically to play with it.
Few comments : I may have interepretted something described below in a wrong way. My apologies before hand.
On a standalone installation of galaxy while I was trying to explore one FASTQ(sequence) file. It takes considerable (> 20 min) for a fastq file to get uploaded (2 GB).
Are you using the Galaxy upload utility to create an item in your history that points to the dataset file on disk?
Yes that is precisely correct, I am trying to upload a solexa FASTQ file but on a standalone galaxy installation from my local file system.
I am not sure what is the rationale
behind that. Ideally I think there should be no need to upload such heavy files into the workspace.
A data file that originates from a place external to Galaxy must be uploaded into Galaxy so that the disk file can be placed in the location configured in the Galaxy config file. †Also, when data is uploaded to
Galaxy ( either to a history or a library ), several database table settings are created that are used by various Galaxy features.
They could actually be used straight
Thanks for the clarification but I am not sure this will help a lot of people who are interested to install and run galaxy locally mainly for the following reasons. May be it is just local to me.
A. We already one instance of data saved on the local file system B. Making another copy via galaxy will eat away a lot of space in long run. C. The time needed to import the files into galaxy space is huge
away by the path specified.
What do you mean by "the path specified"?
Well what I mean was a way to specify the path of the file/run on the lcoal file system and galaxy could directly pick it up from there rather than uploading it into its own space. Now I understand this might not work based on the way the system was designed.
Also is there any way to access the
scripts for analysis on the command line. I know this undermines the main aim of working with galaxy but rite now I am concerned about the performance/time.
You should be able to run any Galaxy tool from the command line as long as you have all of the tool's required binaries in your path. †However, running a tool from within Galaxy should generally not be any slower than running it outside of Galaxy, depending, of course, on what you are doing.
Ok I was under the impression that running from SHELL will eliminate the step of uploading them into galaxy file space.
-Abhi
I will be happy to discuss more about this in case you have some comments/questions for me.
Best, -Abhi
-----------------------------
Abhishek Pratap
Bioinformatics Software Engineer
Institute for Genome Sciences
School of Medicine, Univ of Maryland
801, W. Baltimore Street, Baltimore, MD 21209
Ph: (+1)-410-706-2296
www.igs.umaryland.edu/ <http://www.igs.umaryland.edu/> _______________________________________________ galaxy-user mailing list galaxy-user@bx.psu.edu <mailto:galaxy-user@bx.psu.edu>
http://mail.bx.psu.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/galaxy-user
Anton Nekrutenko http://nekrut.bx.psu.edu http://galaxyproject.org
_______________________________________________ galaxy-user mailing list galaxy-user@bx.psu.edu <mailto:galaxy-user@bx.psu.edu>