|
Resources
Public Data Sets on AWS
GenBank
 |
An annotated collection of all publicly available DNA sequences including more than 85.7B bases and 82.8M sequence records.
| Submitted By: |
Dave@AWS
|
| US Snapshot ID (Linux/Unix): |
snap-31543258 |
| Size: |
200GB |
| Creation Date: |
12/04/2008 |
| Last Updated: |
12/08/2009 |
| License: |
Other |
| Source: |
National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) |
|
|
 |
GenBank is the NIH genetic sequence database, an annotated collection of all publicly available DNA sequences (Nucleic Acids Research, 2008 Jan;36(Database issue):D25-30). There are approximately 85,759,586,764 bases in 82,853,685 sequence records in the traditional GenBank divisions and 108,635,736,141 bases in 27,439,206 sequence records in the WGS division as of February 2008
|
Posts:
22
Registered:
10/29/08
|
|
|
|
GenBank snapshot corrupted?
Posted:
Apr 25, 2009 12:14 PM PDT
|
|
|
I was attempting to mount the GenBank data from this snapshot today and I am having issues when mounting. I have successfully mounted several other Amazon Public Data sets, but this one is giving me trouble.
Here are the steps I followed:
* Create volume from snapshot (with appropriate size)
* Attach volume to instance (Debian base)
* Mount volume
When I attempt to mount, it simple hangs. I do not believe it is an issue of the size of the volume since I have successfully mounted the PubChem library (230GB).
Cheers,
David
|
|
Posts:
158
Registered:
5/30/08
|
|
|
|
Re: GenBank snapshot corrupted?
Posted:
Apr 25, 2009 3:46 PM PDT
in response to: David Arthur
|
|
|
Hi David,
Thanks for letting us know. We'll take a look and get this corrected.
Regards,
JoeJ
|
|
Posts:
15
Registered:
10/13/08
|
|
|
|
Re: GenBank snapshot corrupted?
Posted:
Apr 28, 2009 5:23 PM PDT
in response to: David Arthur
|
|
|
We just posted an updated snapshot (snap-60689509) that should resolve the problem.
Thanks for pointing this out.
|
|
Posts:
22
Registered:
10/29/08
|
|
|
|
Re: GenBank snapshot corrupted?
Posted:
Apr 29, 2009 8:03 AM PDT
in response to: David Arthur
|
|
|
Thanks for the attention to this and the quick repair
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|