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
From my understanding of the code, in paired-end processing, both fastq input files could be processed parallelly, but they are currently sequential. Is this correct? If so, I could take this feature up.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Yes, it this is correct. If the trimming could occur in parallel it might indeed speed up the run-time, which sill allowing the the same flexibility further downstream. It might have to be taken care of for resource allocation later on, e.g. on nf-core, but this would be a subsequent step. If you want to have a go at it - that could be nice!
From my understanding of the code, in paired-end processing, both fastq input files could be processed parallelly, but they are currently sequential. Is this correct? If so, I could take this feature up.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: