-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
difference between CancerVar and VIC? #6
Comments
There are some difference between CancerVar and VIC. VIC is my first version. CancerVar optimized the score strategy, also the datasets are bigger and updated. |
thanks. So i tried both CancerVar and VIC for 10 input variants. Time consuming varied greatly. CancerVar took 42 mins while VIC took only 6 mins. Consistent reference datasets used for ANNOVAR step. Results are pasted as below.
Additionally, i noticed that the latest update time for VIC is 3 months ago and CancerVar is 6 months. Are these two programs both under active developing? Which one preferred? |
That's not normal, not sure your running environment , normally in linux, cancervar can quickly process 10 variants < 3 mins in single thread, 40 mins seems not right, for example I am using python2.7 and one Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2650 v2 @ 2.60GHz. |
I'm using Python 2.7.5 and 32 Intel(R) Xeon(R) Silver 4110 CPU @ 2.10GHz. Running info: |
most of the time spent on gnomad211_genome database when performing ANNOVAR |
No description provided.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: