sra-stat --statistics very slow on (ENA) SRA reads ERR5102882
Dear biostars out there :-),
I want to run sra-stat --statistics on a quite huge set of reads. After 50% it starts slowing down extremely and seems to never end.
A preliminary run of
sra-stat --xml --quick ERR5102882 > ERR5102882_sra-stat_quick.xml
revealed:
<Run accession="ERR5102882" spot_count="60717439" base_count="8906049287" base_count_bio="8906049287" cmp_base_count="8906049287">
So 60717439 spots = reads (= table lines ?) is quite a number. I tried to use --threads but this is not an option for this tool.
sra-stat --help suggests an --start and --stop option
So I plan to split up in smaller "packages" and afterwards merging the statistics together?
sra-stat --start 1 --stop 10717439 --xml --statistics --show_progress --verbose ERR5102882 > ERR5102882_sra-stat_statistics_PART_01.xml
Does anybody know a better way?
Thanks in advance, Cheers, Katharina
• 2,072 views
•
link
0 answers
No answers yet.
Log in to answer this question.
I am not sure what exactly you are looking for from
sra-statbut you can get the following information by using EntrezDirect:Hi GenoMax,
Thanks for your answer. efetch can provide the same information as sra-stat --statistics regarding number of bases (A, T C, G) and Ns, avg read length & stdev and is much faster. I found these options to give a similar output to that of sra-stat --statistics :
time efetch -db sra -id ERR5102882 -format native -mode xml > QC/efetch/ERR5102882_efetch_native.xml
real 0m2,892s user 0m0,158s sys 0m0,070s
That command takes like 2 seconds on my machine. It is just collecting preparsed stats, it is not accessing the file itself.
Not sure what you can get from these information though.
Hi ATpoint,
Thanks for your answer. The --quick option runs very fast, indeed. However, the --statistics option is actually very slow. They create slightly different outputs with not much added value regarding information when using --statistics (number of Ns, avg read length, stdev of read length). Maybe it could be useful to indicate and localize "bad" spots on the flow cell?
output of --statistics:
Wouldn’t ‚bad spots‘ anyway be removed by adapter and quality trim?