Skip process if the output file is present in Nextflow

Hi,

I have these 2 dummy scripts to get my hand on nextflow pipeline's creation. \ main.nf

#!/usr/bin/env nextflow
nextflow.enable.dsl=2

// Include in workflow
include {
    ECHO;
    WRITE_STDOUT
} from "./modules.nf"

// Parameter initialization
if (!params.samples){params.samplesList = ["s1", "s2"]}
params.samplesList = params.samples?.split(',') as List

params.fastqdir = "./data/fastqs"
params.index = ["1", "2"]

workflow {

    Channel
        .fromPath(params.fastqdir)
        .set { fastqdir_ch }

    Channel 
        .fromList(params.samplesList)
        .set {sampleList_ch}

    Channel 
        .fromList(params.index)
        .set {readIndex_ch}

    full_fq_paths_ch = ECHO(
        sampleList_ch
            .combine(readIndex_ch)
            .combine(fastqdir_ch)
            .view()
    )

    merge_txt_ch = WRITE_STDOUT(
        full_fq_paths_ch
            .groupTuple(by: 0)
    )
}

and modules.nf

#!/usr/bin/env nextflow
nextflow.enable.dsl=2

process ECHO {
    input: 
        tuple(
            val(sample_id), 
            val(read_id), 
            path(fastq_prefix)
        )

    output:
        tuple(
            val("${sample_id}"),
            path("${sample_id}_out.${read_id}.txt")
        )

    script:
        """
        echo "${fastq_prefix}/${sample_id}_${read_id}.fastq.gz" >> "${sample_id}_out.${read_id}.txt"
        """
}

process WRITE_STDOUT {
    publishDir './data/fastqc', mode: 'copy'

    input: 
        tuple val(sample_id), path(fastq_paths)

    output:
        path "${sample_id}/${sample_id}.output.txt"

    script: 
        """
        mkdir ${sample_id}
        cat ${fastq_paths.join(" ")} >> "${sample_id}/${sample_id}.output.txt"
        """
}

The only goal is to test the pipeline. For now it is working by running for example: \ nextflow run ./scripts/main.nf --samples s1,s2,s3

I would like to go one step further and dynamicaly disable processes (without using specific flags) if all outputs are already present in one particular directory (not the nextflow working directory). Following the workflow I give, this would mean not to launch the ECHO process if all text files have been created for all samples (s1_out.1.txt, s2_out.1.txt, s3_out.1.txt etc...)

I am aware of the -resume method but this only work if the pipeline has been launched before. Is it possible to do this and how?

Thank you very much

nextflow pipeline

• 4,790 views • link

written 4.1 years ago by Alexis •

3 answers

You can either skip the process using when as stated earlier, use the branch operator, to have multiple channels, and choose which one is going in the process or not.

I'd add that you might also want to think about what you plan after.

For example if you need to collect outputs before and after said skip process.

• 0 views • link

written 4.1 years ago by Maxime Garcia

You could use the when declaration to skip a process under specified circumstances, but you run into the trouble of your subsequent input channel remaining empty. I don't think your usecase is properly supported by nextflow, because it already has the -resume functionality.

You can also make a construction where you make a channel from the directory that would contain the files that cause a skip, only if that channel remains empty you initialize the channel required for the first process.

I like both of those solutions less than just using the -resume functionality.

• 0 views • link

written 4.1 years ago by pbioinf •

you could test if the file exists using test -f and a full path (but that's a bad idea, you shouldn't to this in NF)

(...)
output:
    path("done.txt")
script:
"""
if [ ! -f /path/to/${sample}/data.txt ] ;

      echo "blablabla"  > /path/to/${sample}/data.txt 

fi

touch done.txt
"""
}

• 0 views • link

written 4.1 years ago by Pierre Lindenbaum

For whatt I understand, one of the strength of nextflow is to work remotly with symlinks. I know that what I ask is outside of the normal usecases of nextflow.

Thank you very much for your insight

• 0 views • link

written 4.1 years ago by Alexis •