Allow partial batches

[arbennett]

Description of proposed changes

This is a simple additional flag that allows for "partial" batches to be returned.

Fixes #123

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:

Project coverage is 96.30%. Comparing base (43c9135) to head (8b28973). Report is 11 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #177      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   96.25%   96.30%   +0.05%     
==========================================
  Files           6        6              
  Lines         347      352       +5     
  Branches       82       83       +1     
==========================================
+ Hits          334      339       +5     
  Misses          8        8              
  Partials        5        5              

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[maxrjones]

@arbennett sorry for the very slow response! This is great!

It would be good to include add a test for this functionality before merging. Please let me know if you'd want to add a test or I can push one if you don't have time.

[acocac]

@maxrjones @arbennett I wondered if we have any updates on this PR. I recently used xbatcher in a tutorial delivered by Pangeo members in Europe. I added a warning note indicating xbatcher doesn't (yet) return partial batches and mentioned some workarounds (please see the note before the References section).

@weiji14 you've suggested posting this somewhere. I hope this is the correct place for starting the conversation and follow-up actions.

[arbennett]

@acocac - thanks for pinging me, I totally lost track of this. I just merged upstream changes into my branch.

@maxrjones - sorry I also missed your ping here, I'll see if I can add a test for this real quick.

[arbennett]

@maxrjones - okay test added! Sorry for the bad commit message, my backticks got the best of me 🤦

Anyhow, I think the test is implemented correctly, but the need to do the rounding is kinda ugly IMO. Let me know if you have an easy way to clean that up.

[maxrjones]

Thanks @arbennett! Mind if I push to your branch to fix the pre-commit errors? I'll also take a look at the rounding logic today