Workaround for GenomicsDB multiallelics in M2 pon creation #6871
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
davidbenjamin
changed the title
|
@davidbenjamin Can you add a test to prove that this fixes #6744 ? |
fleharty
approved these changes
Oct 8, 2020
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good to me. Though I want to make sure we follow up with the 3 TODOs in here.
Do we have tickets for these?
TODO: replace this logic where multiallelic sites are excluded from germline analysis with something principled
TODO for some analysis as to why the AD field may not be available barring changes to GenomicsDB
|
@droazen An existing integration test already tested the full pipeline including merging VCFs with GenomicsDB and creating the panel. I modified the input VCFs to contain multiallelic sites that previously failed. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
@fleharty This fixes #6744, deferring a more principled solution for later. Can we get it in for Friday's release?