Adding one regression test for fractional grid #196
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Shan, would yo please commit the log files after you finish RT on hera? I will run RT from your branch on orion and wcoss (wcoss is currently not available, have to run RT when it's back). |
|
Hi Jun,
Thanks for getting back to me promptly. There are log files of
(1) all log files under <mydir>/tests/*.log
(2) <mydir>/log/
Which one should I commit to the repository?
Since I am adding one extra regression test, I am running this test only on
hera. Would it be ok to commit the log files for this test only?
Thanks,
Shan
…On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 5:57 PM Jun Wang ***@***.***> wrote:
Shan, would yo please commit the log files after you finish RT on hera? I
will run RT from your branch on orion and wcoss (wcoss is currently not
available, have to run RT when it's back).
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#196 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALORMVTV5WRNDMIW2NVKHADSHKDP7ANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q>
.
|
|
Shan, I am thinking maybe it's better to add fractional grid test based on cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_ww3_1d_bmark_rt which has wave component? |
…_ww3_1d_bmark_rt_frac"; -- Needed to modify cpld_fv3_mom6_cice_ww3_bmark_rt_run.IN. With it, the non-fractional test of "cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_ww3_1d_bmark_rt" produced bitwise identical results.
|
Hi Jun,
Good idea. I have added
tests/Compile_hera.intel.log
tests/RegressionTests_hera.intel.log
tests/fv3_conf/cpld_fv3_mom6_cice_ww3_bmark_rt_run.IN
tests/rt.conf
tests/tests/cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_ww3_1d_bmark_rt_frac
i.e., a new test for ww3 with fractional landmask and log files. The
existing non-fractional ww3 test produced bitwise identical results.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks,
Shan
…On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 6:29 AM Jun Wang ***@***.***> wrote:
Shan, I am thinking maybe it's better to add fractional grid test based on
cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_ww3_1d_bmark_rt which has wave component?
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#196 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALORMVTK6ELWG32KFXTMWVLSHM3TPANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q>
.
|
|
The wave frac test needs to wait until the bugfix for the MOM input template (#195) gets committed. Otherwise it is not testing waves. I can commit the bug fix soon---hera and orion are done but I've been waiting for dell to come back. Then once it was back I had to wait until the baselines were sync'd. That took most of yesterday and the final baseline did not transfer completely (it seems to have died). |
|
Thanks for the info. My changes are relatively minor. I can update my
commit rather quickly when the top develop evolves.
Shan
…On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 5:13 AM Denise Worthen ***@***.***> wrote:
The wave frac test needs to wait until the bugfix for the MOM input
template (#195 <#195>)
gets committed. Otherwise it is not testing waves.
I can commit the bug fix soon---hera and orion are done but I've been
waiting for dell to come back. Then once it was back I had to wait until
the baselines were sync'd. That took most of yesterday and the final
baseline did not transfer completely (it seems to have died).
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#196 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALORMVXTM5YO3OZ4DN7SJULSHR3NTANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q>
.
|
|
So the FV3 PR (#200) is supposed to come after this. I don't believe a baseline has been created for this test yet? Has that task been assigned or does someone need to do it? After the baseline is created, will the full RT need to be run again including the new test? |
|
Bin is working on the #PR 200.
…On Thu, Oct 1, 2020 at 11:46 AM Denise Worthen ***@***.***> wrote:
So the FV3 PR (#200
<#200>) is supposed to
come after this. I don't believe a baseline has been created for this test
yet?
Has that task been assigned or does someone need to do it? After the
baseline is created, will the full RT need to be run again including the
new test?
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#196 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AI7D6TKXKQ2HS63JQRTEBJ3SISP4LANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q>
.
|
|
Shan, it looks to me you haven't update CEMSP and FV3 yet in your branch. Would you please do: checkout your regression_test_p6_20200924 branch We can then run RT. |
|
Hi Jun,
Sorry about that. Coming soon,
Shan
…On Sun, Oct 4, 2020 at 9:17 PM Jun Wang ***@***.***> wrote:
Shan, it looks to me you haven't update CEMSP and FV3 yet in your branch.
Would you please do:
checkout your regression_test_p6_20200924 branch
%cd FV3
%git checkout 9e1ba7c
%git submodule update --init --recursive
%git log
(you should see:
commit 9e1ba7c7448a8d009f39b5588e9498a7dbab1c60
Author: Dom Heinzeller ***@***.***
Date: Sat Sep 26 07:15:33 2020 -0600
...)
%cd ../CMEPS
%git checkout emc/develop
%git log
(you should see:
commit 4d50adf2c63749241afbc028cbe245881b087585
Author: Rahul Mahajan ***@***.***
Date: Wed Sep 30 18:30:57 2020 -0400
...)
%cd ../(now you are in ufs-s2s-model)
%git status
(your should see
...
modified: CMEPS (new commits, untracked content)
modified: FV3 (new commits)
..)
%git commit -a -m"update subcomponents in s2s"
%git push origin regression_test_p6_20200924
We can then run RT.
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#196 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALORMVSH2VXPFRLWYYMW37LSJE3DNANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q>
.
|
|
I discovered on Friday a problem with the frac_grid input in non-frac mode when testing for PR #194. Ice fraction was appearing on points where slmsk=1. Shan was able to fix the current oro_data for this issue. The sfc and phy input is good as is:
She generated new input with the fixed oro data here: /scratch1/BMC/gsd-fv3-dev/fv3data We should be sure to update the FV3_input_frac on all platforms before creating a new baseline for this test. I wasn't sure what the status was of the baselines over the weekend so I have not yet done this on any platform. |
|
Denise, since Shan just merged with the latest develop branch, I am going
to create a new baseline with the updated code. the fv3_input_frac data
will be update with /scratch1/BMC/gsd-fv3-dev/fv3data
…On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 7:27 AM Denise Worthen ***@***.***> wrote:
I discovered on Friday a problem with the frac_grid input in non-frac mode
when testing for PR #194
<#194>. Ice fraction
was appearing on points where slmsk=1. Shan was able to fix the current
oro_data for this issue. The sfc and phy input is good as is:
In sfc data, I had made sure that for all ice points, slmsk=2, and for the
rest of not-all-land points, slmsk=0, which is floor(land_frac). However,
in oro data, slmsk was still using nint(land_frac). All I did today was set
to replace nint(land_frac) by slmsk=floor(land_frac) in the oro data. So
you will see all changes along coastlines because of this.
So the short answer is that this was done in sfc data already. gfs data
does not use "slmsk".
She generated new input with the fixed oro data here:
/scratch1/BMC/gsd-fv3-dev/fv3data
We should be sure to update the FV3_input_frac on all platforms before
creating a new baseline for this test. I wasn't sure what the status was of
the baselines over the weekend so I have not yet done this on any platform.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#196 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AI7D6TPZYCN6EAC7QXPW2LLSJGUQPANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q>
.
|
junwang-noaa
reviewed
Oct 5, 2020
|
|
||
| # Restart | ||
| else | ||
| # Restart files |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Shan, Have you tested the restart reproducibility with fractional test (FV3-MOM6-CICE6)?
…cmeps_ww3_1d_bmark_rt", which passed the regression test, and its corresponding fractional landmask test "cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_ww3_1d_bmark_rt_frac".
|
Hi Jun,
Do you mean a frac version of the "cpld_fv3_ccpp_mom6_cice_cmeps_restart"
test? No, I haven't tried. I can give it a try.
Since there is no existing baseline to compare against, I need to build a
baseline first, which is cpld_fv3_ccpp_mom6_cice_cmeps_3d_atm_flux, right?
I will change RTPWD to my own dir. Will keep you updated.
Shan
…On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 7:34 AM Jun Wang ***@***.***> wrote:
***@***.**** commented on this pull request.
------------------------------
In tests/fv3_conf/cpld_fv3_mom6_cice_ww3_bmark_rt_run.IN
<#196 (comment)>
:
> # the BM ICs are still named cice5 and need to remain so until P5.0 is completed
-cp @***@***.***.*.nc ./cice_model.res.nc
+ cp @***@***.***.*.nc ./cice_model.res.nc
+
+# Restart
+else
+ # Restart files
Shan, Have you tested the restart reproducibility with fractional test
(FV3-MOM6-CICE6)?
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#196 (review)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALORMVXY2DZDR47UTYLBLSTSJHDOZANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q>
.
|
|
Shan, I just copied C192.mx050_frac C384.mx025_frac C384_l127.mx025_frac C96.mx025_frac C96.mx100_frac C384.mx050_frac from /scratch1/BMC/gsd-fv3-dev/fv3data (created on 10/2) to /scratch1/NCEPDEV/nems/emc.nemspara/RT/FV3-MOM6-CICE5/develop-20200928/FV3_input_frac. Since in your PR, you added two tests: cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_2d_atm_flux_frac and cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_ww3_1d_bmark_rt_frac, would you please also add cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_2d_atm_flux_frac in rt.conf? After that, please run RT for the two tests and then let me know your run directory, I can copy the results to the baseline, then we will run the full regression test. So if you have cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_2d_atm_flux_frac test, then it can serve as the control test for your fractional grid restart reproducibility test. |
|
Hi Jun,
I will add this test "cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_2d_atm_flux_frac".
The current restart test is for C96, comparing results from (1) a non-stop
run to 72hrs, (2) a restart run from 48 to 72.
For C384, should we compare results from (1) a non-stop run to 48hrs as
shown above, (2) a restart run from 24 to 48? If so, then I need to add
another 1d test to build the base for (2) to start from, right?
Thanks,
Shan
…On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 8:21 AM Jun Wang ***@***.***> wrote:
Shan, I just copied C192.mx050_frac C384.mx025_frac C384_l127.mx025_frac
C96.mx025_frac C96.mx100_frac C384.mx050_frac from
/scratch1/BMC/gsd-fv3-dev/fv3data (created on 10/2) to
/scratch1/NCEPDEV/nems/emc.nemspara/RT/FV3-MOM6-CICE5/develop-20200928/FV3_input_frac.
Since in your PR, you added two tests:
cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_2d_atm_flux_frac and
cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_ww3_1d_bmark_rt_frac, would you please
also add cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_2d_atm_flux_frac in rt.conf?
After that, please run RT for the two tests and then let me know your run
directory, I can copy the results to the baseline, then we will run the
full regression test.
So if you have cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_2d_atm_flux_frac test,
then it can serve as the control test for your restart reproducibility test.
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#196 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALORMVSYZMXC556HXXJ2VIDSJHI47ANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q>
.
|
|
Shan,
We can add the fractional grid restart test later. For this commit, let's
just add two fractional grid tests:
cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_2d_atm_flux_frac and
cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_ww3_1d_bmark_rt_frac. This allows us to
set up the control test for restart test that we can work on later.
…On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 10:43 AM shansun6 ***@***.***> wrote:
Hi Jun,
I will add this test "cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_2d_atm_flux_frac".
The current restart test is for C96, comparing results from (1) a non-stop
run to 72hrs, (2) a restart run from 48 to 72.
For C384, should we compare results from (1) a non-stop run to 48hrs as
shown above, (2) a restart run from 24 to 48? If so, then I need to add
another 1d test to build the base for (2) to start from, right?
Thanks,
Shan
On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 8:21 AM Jun Wang ***@***.***> wrote:
> Shan, I just copied C192.mx050_frac C384.mx025_frac C384_l127.mx025_frac
> C96.mx025_frac C96.mx100_frac C384.mx050_frac from
> /scratch1/BMC/gsd-fv3-dev/fv3data (created on 10/2) to
>
/scratch1/NCEPDEV/nems/emc.nemspara/RT/FV3-MOM6-CICE5/develop-20200928/FV3_input_frac.
> Since in your PR, you added two tests:
> cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_2d_atm_flux_frac and
> cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_ww3_1d_bmark_rt_frac, would you please
> also add cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_2d_atm_flux_frac in rt.conf?
> After that, please run RT for the two tests and then let me know your run
> directory, I can copy the results to the baseline, then we will run the
> full regression test.
>
> So if you have cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_2d_atm_flux_frac test,
> then it can serve as the control test for your restart reproducibility
test.
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <
#196 (comment)
>,
> or unsubscribe
> <
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALORMVSYZMXC556HXXJ2VIDSJHI47ANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q
>
> .
>
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#196 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AI7D6TMAYJCFO3XB3PHWVLTSJHLR7ANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q>
.
|
|
Ok, got it. I am running it right now. Will let you know when it is done.
-Shan
…On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 9:19 AM Jun Wang ***@***.***> wrote:
Shan,
We can add the fractional grid restart test later. For this commit, let's
just add two fractional grid tests:
cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_2d_atm_flux_frac and
cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_ww3_1d_bmark_rt_frac. This allows us to
set up the control test for restart test that we can work on later.
On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 10:43 AM shansun6 ***@***.***> wrote:
> Hi Jun,
>
> I will add this test
"cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_2d_atm_flux_frac".
>
> The current restart test is for C96, comparing results from (1) a
non-stop
> run to 72hrs, (2) a restart run from 48 to 72.
>
> For C384, should we compare results from (1) a non-stop run to 48hrs as
> shown above, (2) a restart run from 24 to 48? If so, then I need to add
> another 1d test to build the base for (2) to start from, right?
>
> Thanks,
> Shan
>
> On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 8:21 AM Jun Wang ***@***.***>
wrote:
>
> > Shan, I just copied C192.mx050_frac C384.mx025_frac
C384_l127.mx025_frac
> > C96.mx025_frac C96.mx100_frac C384.mx050_frac from
> > /scratch1/BMC/gsd-fv3-dev/fv3data (created on 10/2) to
> >
>
/scratch1/NCEPDEV/nems/emc.nemspara/RT/FV3-MOM6-CICE5/develop-20200928/FV3_input_frac.
> > Since in your PR, you added two tests:
> > cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_2d_atm_flux_frac and
> > cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_ww3_1d_bmark_rt_frac, would you
please
> > also add cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_2d_atm_flux_frac in rt.conf?
> > After that, please run RT for the two tests and then let me know your
run
> > directory, I can copy the results to the baseline, then we will run the
> > full regression test.
> >
> > So if you have cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_2d_atm_flux_frac test,
> > then it can serve as the control test for your restart reproducibility
> test.
> >
> > —
> > You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
> > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> > <
>
#196 (comment)
> >,
> > or unsubscribe
> > <
>
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALORMVSYZMXC556HXXJ2VIDSJHI47ANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q
> >
> > .
> >
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <
#196 (comment)
>,
> or unsubscribe
> <
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AI7D6TMAYJCFO3XB3PHWVLTSJHLR7ANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q
>
> .
>
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#196 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALORMVXLC277KD2QQUEBOV3SJHPWVANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q>
.
|
|
Great, I will run the two tests on orion/dell.
…On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 11:30 AM shansun6 ***@***.***> wrote:
Ok, got it. I am running it right now. Will let you know when it is done.
-Shan
On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 9:19 AM Jun Wang ***@***.***> wrote:
> Shan,
> We can add the fractional grid restart test later. For this commit, let's
> just add two fractional grid tests:
> cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_2d_atm_flux_frac and
> cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_ww3_1d_bmark_rt_frac. This allows us to
> set up the control test for restart test that we can work on later.
>
> On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 10:43 AM shansun6 ***@***.***>
wrote:
>
> > Hi Jun,
> >
> > I will add this test
> "cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_2d_atm_flux_frac".
> >
> > The current restart test is for C96, comparing results from (1) a
> non-stop
> > run to 72hrs, (2) a restart run from 48 to 72.
> >
> > For C384, should we compare results from (1) a non-stop run to 48hrs as
> > shown above, (2) a restart run from 24 to 48? If so, then I need to add
> > another 1d test to build the base for (2) to start from, right?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Shan
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 8:21 AM Jun Wang ***@***.***>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Shan, I just copied C192.mx050_frac C384.mx025_frac
> C384_l127.mx025_frac
> > > C96.mx025_frac C96.mx100_frac C384.mx050_frac from
> > > /scratch1/BMC/gsd-fv3-dev/fv3data (created on 10/2) to
> > >
> >
>
/scratch1/NCEPDEV/nems/emc.nemspara/RT/FV3-MOM6-CICE5/develop-20200928/FV3_input_frac.
> > > Since in your PR, you added two tests:
> > > cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_2d_atm_flux_frac and
> > > cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_ww3_1d_bmark_rt_frac, would you
> please
> > > also add cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_2d_atm_flux_frac in
rt.conf?
> > > After that, please run RT for the two tests and then let me know your
> run
> > > directory, I can copy the results to the baseline, then we will run
the
> > > full regression test.
> > >
> > > So if you have cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_2d_atm_flux_frac
test,
> > > then it can serve as the control test for your restart
reproducibility
> > test.
> > >
> > > —
> > > You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
> > > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> > > <
> >
>
#196 (comment)
> > >,
> > > or unsubscribe
> > > <
> >
>
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALORMVSYZMXC556HXXJ2VIDSJHI47ANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q
> > >
> > > .
> > >
> >
> > —
> > You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> > <
>
#196 (comment)
> >,
> > or unsubscribe
> > <
>
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AI7D6TMAYJCFO3XB3PHWVLTSJHLR7ANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q
> >
> > .
> >
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <
#196 (comment)
>,
> or unsubscribe
> <
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALORMVXLC277KD2QQUEBOV3SJHPWVANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q
>
> .
>
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#196 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AI7D6TICSGCHOE6GZQSVG23SJHQ7ZANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q>
.
|
…l landmask: (1) cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_2d_atm_flux (2) cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_2d_atm_flux_frac (3) cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_ww3_1d_bmark_rt (4) cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_ww3_1d_bmark_rt_frac
|
Hi Jun,
I just finished testing these cases and updated my branch. The cases I did
were:
(1) cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_2d_atm_flux
(2) cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_2d_atm_flux_frac
(3) cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_ww3_1d_bmark_rt
(4) cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_ww3_1d_bmark_rt_frac
Forgot to mention that both (1) and (3) can reproduce the baselines, except
"ufs.s2s.cpl.r.2013-04-02-00000.nc" comparison failed for both of them,
even though results from ncdump are identical. Any idea what to do next?
Thanks,
Shan
…On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 9:32 AM Jun Wang ***@***.***> wrote:
Great, I will run the two tests on orion/dell.
On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 11:30 AM shansun6 ***@***.***> wrote:
> Ok, got it. I am running it right now. Will let you know when it is done.
> -Shan
>
> On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 9:19 AM Jun Wang ***@***.***>
wrote:
>
> > Shan,
> > We can add the fractional grid restart test later. For this commit,
let's
> > just add two fractional grid tests:
> > cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_2d_atm_flux_frac and
> > cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_ww3_1d_bmark_rt_frac. This allows us
to
> > set up the control test for restart test that we can work on later.
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 10:43 AM shansun6 ***@***.***>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Jun,
> > >
> > > I will add this test
> > "cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_2d_atm_flux_frac".
> > >
> > > The current restart test is for C96, comparing results from (1) a
> > non-stop
> > > run to 72hrs, (2) a restart run from 48 to 72.
> > >
> > > For C384, should we compare results from (1) a non-stop run to 48hrs
as
> > > shown above, (2) a restart run from 24 to 48? If so, then I need to
add
> > > another 1d test to build the base for (2) to start from, right?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Shan
> > >
> > > On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 8:21 AM Jun Wang ***@***.***>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Shan, I just copied C192.mx050_frac C384.mx025_frac
> > C384_l127.mx025_frac
> > > > C96.mx025_frac C96.mx100_frac C384.mx050_frac from
> > > > /scratch1/BMC/gsd-fv3-dev/fv3data (created on 10/2) to
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
/scratch1/NCEPDEV/nems/emc.nemspara/RT/FV3-MOM6-CICE5/develop-20200928/FV3_input_frac.
> > > > Since in your PR, you added two tests:
> > > > cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_2d_atm_flux_frac and
> > > > cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_ww3_1d_bmark_rt_frac, would you
> > please
> > > > also add cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_2d_atm_flux_frac in
> rt.conf?
> > > > After that, please run RT for the two tests and then let me know
your
> > run
> > > > directory, I can copy the results to the baseline, then we will run
> the
> > > > full regression test.
> > > >
> > > > So if you have cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_2d_atm_flux_frac
> test,
> > > > then it can serve as the control test for your restart
> reproducibility
> > > test.
> > > >
> > > > —
> > > > You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
> > > > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> > > > <
> > >
> >
>
#196 (comment)
> > > >,
> > > > or unsubscribe
> > > > <
> > >
> >
>
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALORMVSYZMXC556HXXJ2VIDSJHI47ANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q
> > > >
> > > > .
> > > >
> > >
> > > —
> > > You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> > > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> > > <
> >
>
#196 (comment)
> > >,
> > > or unsubscribe
> > > <
> >
>
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AI7D6TMAYJCFO3XB3PHWVLTSJHLR7ANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q
> > >
> > > .
> > >
> >
> > —
> > You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
> > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> > <
>
#196 (comment)
> >,
> > or unsubscribe
> > <
>
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALORMVXLC277KD2QQUEBOV3SJHPWVANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q
> >
> > .
> >
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <
#196 (comment)
>,
> or unsubscribe
> <
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AI7D6TICSGCHOE6GZQSVG23SJHQ7ZANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q
>
> .
>
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#196 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALORMVSLTAKMT4SO5DKBWODSJHRG3ANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q>
.
|
…-00000.nc" comparison temporarily, before a solution comes up; -- All 4 tests passed regression tests.
|
Hi Jun,
I have committed the revised tests in my branch, by commenting out "
ufs.s2s.cpl.r.2016-10-05-00000.nc" comparison temporarily. Please let me if
you have any questions.
Thanks,
Shan
On Wed, Oct 7, 2020 at 9:53 AM Shan Sun - NOAA Federal <shan.sun@noaa.gov>
wrote:
… Hi Jun,
Thanks. I am repeating the 4 tests now, and will let you know when they
are done successfully.
Shan
On Wed, Oct 7, 2020 at 9:40 AM Jun Wang ***@***.***> wrote:
> Shan, you may also want to comment out the ufs.s2s.cpl.r. in the
> corresponding non-frac tests too as these tests will fail if you compare
> the ufs.s2s.cpl.r. file with baseline. By the way, I copied your two test
> results to baseline
> /scratch1/NCEPDEV/nems/emc.nemspara/RT/FV3-MOM6-CICE5/develop-20200928.
> Please run full RT on hera after your commit.
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <#196 (comment)>,
> or unsubscribe
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALORMVU5L2YFDCTLUJRRU33SJSDWFANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q>
> .
>
|
|
Shan, I run full RT on orion, it looks to me we need to comment out all the tests "ufs.s2s.cpl.r." except the cpld_fv3_ccpp_mom6_cice_cmeps_6h_debug test, in which the ufs.s2s.cpl.r.2016-10-03-21600.nc is reproducible from run to run. |
|
Hi Jun,
I will do the same: run the full RT after commenting out "ufs.s2s.cpl".
Will keep you updated tomorrow.
Thanks,
Shan
…On Wed, Oct 7, 2020 at 7:12 PM Jun Wang ***@***.***> wrote:
Shan, I run full RT on orion, it looks to me we need to comment out all
the tests "ufs.s2s.cpl.r." except the
cpld_fv3_ccpp_mom6_cice_cmeps_6h_debug test, in which the
ufs.s2s.cpl.r.2016-10-03-21600.nc are reproducible from run to run.
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#196 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALORMVS3GBLZRQCV72XTIPDSJUGWVANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q>
.
|
…orarily in all tests, except "cpld_fv3_ccpp_mom6_cice_cmeps_6h_debug"; -- All regression tests in rt.conf have passed.
binli2337
approved these changes
Oct 8, 2020
|
Hi Denise,
Thanks for pointing that out. All ICs under /FV3_input_frac/ is for RT day
of 2016-10-03. Is there a reason the bmark RT runs on the date 2013-04-01?
It would be better to run these 2 tests:
cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_ww3_1d_bmark_rt
cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_ww3_1d_bmark_rt_frac
on the same day to have them compatible. Should I change the non-frac test
to the date 2016-10-03? Please advise.
Thanks,
Shan
…On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 12:08 PM Denise Worthen ***@***.***> wrote:
***@***.**** commented on this pull request.
------------------------------
In tests/fv3_conf/cpld_fv3_mom6_cice_ww3_bmark_rt_run.IN
<#196 (comment)>
:
> @@ -44,12 +48,44 @@ cp @***@***.******@***.***.nc .
cp @[RTPWD]/WW3_input_data/mod_def.* .
cp @[RTPWD]/WW3_input_data/ww3_multi.inp .
-# ICs
-cp @[RTPWD]/${FV3_IC}/sfc_data*.nc ./INPUT
-cp @[RTPWD]/${FV3_IC}/gfs_data*.nc ./INPUT
-cp @[RTPWD]/${MOM6_IC}/MOM*.nc ./INPUT
+# No restart
+if [ $WARM_START = .F. ]; then
+ # ICs
+ if [ $FRAC_GRID = .F. ]; then
+ # cp @[RTPWD]/${FV3_DIR}/INPUT/sfc_data*.nc ./INPUT
+ # cp @[RTPWD]/${FV3_DIR}/INPUT/gfs_data*.nc ./INPUT
+ cp @[RTPWD]/${FV3_IC}/sfc_data*.nc ./INPUT
+ cp @[RTPWD]/${FV3_IC}/gfs_data*.nc ./INPUT
+ else
+ cp @***@***.***.***@***.***_frac/sfc_data*.nc ./INPUT
I don't think this is correct. The bmark RT runs on the date 2013-04-01.
Doesn't the FV3_input_frac directory contain the ICs for the "normal" RT
day of 2016-10-03?
I think other additional test (atm_flux_frac) is OK since that is running
on the date of 2016-10-03.
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#196 (review)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALORMVXAB5NXBE55RXMYQULSJX5Y5ANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q>
.
|
|
We have BM ICs only for the first and 15th of each month; the 2013-04-01 date was chosen because if the model was going to fail after updating the code, that date tended to give quick failures (vs not blowing up until day 31 of 35). Changing the bmark RT date won't work because we only have the first and 15th. Have you generated frac_grid ICs for the BM dates? I can't remember. |
|
Hi Denise,
Thanks for your explanations. Yes, I have frac_grid ICs for the BM date. If
it is ok for the RT test to carry 2 sets of ICs, I will go ahead and make
the changes now.
Thanks,
Shan
…On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 1:17 PM Denise Worthen ***@***.***> wrote:
We have BM ICs only for the first and 15th of each month; the 2013-04-01
date was chosen because if the model was going to fail after updating the
code, that date tended to give quick failures (vs not blowing up until day
31 of 35).
Changing the bmark RT date won't work because we only have the first and
15th.
Have you generated frac_grid ICs for the BM dates? I can't remember.
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#196 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALORMVS23XZQCQNGFS66Y7DSJYF4PANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q>
.
|
|
We'll have to add a new directory in the right place to hold the frac_grid BM data but that would be OK. Would you need to re-generate the input after the fix you made from last Friday? @junwang-noaa: What do you think? We could commit only the non-bmark frac grid test now if we've got pressure to move forward for the unification. |
|
Shan, how about we first comment out
the cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_ww3_1d_bmark_rt_frac in rt.conf in
this commit as Denise suggested, please create a new PR with bmark_rt_frac
test after fixing its ICs. Currently we have several other PRs waiting in
the queue. Thanks
…On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 4:19 PM Denise Worthen ***@***.***> wrote:
We'll have to add a new directory in the right place to hold the frac_grid
BM data but that would be OK.
Would you need to re-generate the input after the fix you made from last
Friday?
@junwang-noaa <https://github.com/junwang-noaa>: What do you think? We
could commit only the non-bmark frac grid test now if we've got pressure to
move forward for the unification.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#196 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AI7D6TM63EYBQXIGU5MJ5FTSJYNDJANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q>
.
|
|
Hi Jun,
A good idea. Will do.
Thanks,
Shan
…On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 2:39 PM Jun Wang ***@***.***> wrote:
Shan, how about we first comment out
the cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_ww3_1d_bmark_rt_frac in rt.conf in
this commit as Denise suggested, please create a new PR with bmark_rt_frac
test after fixing its ICs. Currently we have several other PRs waiting in
the queue. Thanks
On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 4:19 PM Denise Worthen ***@***.***>
wrote:
> We'll have to add a new directory in the right place to hold the
frac_grid
> BM data but that would be OK.
>
> Would you need to re-generate the input after the fix you made from last
> Friday?
>
> @junwang-noaa <https://github.com/junwang-noaa>: What do you think? We
> could commit only the non-bmark frac grid test now if we've got pressure
to
> move forward for the unification.
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <
#196 (comment)
>,
> or unsubscribe
> <
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AI7D6TM63EYBQXIGU5MJ5FTSJYNDJANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q
>
> .
>
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#196 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALORMVTP5RJSIBWUZWFYGA3SJYPOFANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q>
.
|
|
Hi Denise,
Where is "BM_IC" defined? Thanks,
Shan
…On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 2:19 PM Denise Worthen ***@***.***> wrote:
We'll have to add a new directory in the right place to hold the frac_grid
BM data but that would be OK.
Would you need to re-generate the input after the fix you made from last
Friday?
@junwang-noaa <https://github.com/junwang-noaa>: What do you think? We
could commit only the non-bmark frac grid test now if we've got pressure to
move forward for the unification.
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#196 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALORMVVLMOSTKOAB6SOY7ULSJYNDJANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q>
.
|
|
In fv3_conf/cpld_fv3_mom6_cice_ww3_bmark_rt_run.IN for example, we set BM_IC to the special IC directory. Depending on platform, that directory has either sym-links to the actual input area or actual copies of the input. |
|
tHi Jun,
I have removed the "cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_ww3_1d_bmark_rt_frac"
test from rt.conf and committed it. Please let me know how it goes.
Thanks,
Shan
On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 2:41 PM Shan Sun - NOAA Federal <shan.sun@noaa.gov>
wrote:
… Hi Jun,
A good idea. Will do.
Thanks,
Shan
On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 2:39 PM Jun Wang ***@***.***> wrote:
> Shan, how about we first comment out
> the cpld_fv3_ccpp_384_mom6_cice_cmeps_ww3_1d_bmark_rt_frac in rt.conf in
> this commit as Denise suggested, please create a new PR with bmark_rt_frac
> test after fixing its ICs. Currently we have several other PRs waiting in
> the queue. Thanks
>
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 4:19 PM Denise Worthen ***@***.***>
> wrote:
>
> > We'll have to add a new directory in the right place to hold the
> frac_grid
> > BM data but that would be OK.
> >
> > Would you need to re-generate the input after the fix you made from last
> > Friday?
> >
> > @junwang-noaa <https://github.com/junwang-noaa>: What do you think? We
> > could commit only the non-bmark frac grid test now if we've got
> pressure to
> > move forward for the unification.
> >
> > —
> > You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> > <
> #196 (comment)
> >,
> > or unsubscribe
> > <
> https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AI7D6TM63EYBQXIGU5MJ5FTSJYNDJANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q
> >
> > .
> >
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <#196 (comment)>,
> or unsubscribe
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALORMVTP5RJSIBWUZWFYGA3SJYPOFANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q>
> .
>
|
DeniseWorthen
approved these changes
Oct 8, 2020
|
Shan, let's rerun the full RT.
…On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 5:26 PM Denise Worthen ***@***.***> wrote:
***@***.**** approved this pull request.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#196 (review)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AI7D6TMHUAM5ZR4MDLSJL4DSJYU5LANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q>
.
|
|
Hi Jun,
Ok. It is compiling now. I will commit the log files tonight when all the
tests are done.
Thanks,
Shan
…On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 3:33 PM Jun Wang ***@***.***> wrote:
Shan, let's rerun the full RT.
On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 5:26 PM Denise Worthen ***@***.***>
wrote:
> ***@***.**** approved this pull request.
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <
#196 (review)
>,
> or unsubscribe
> <
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AI7D6TMHUAM5ZR4MDLSJL4DSJYU5LANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q
>
> .
>
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#196 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALORMVV2N6FG2RHUAYG7ZXTSJYVYRANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q>
.
|
|
Hi Jun,
I have finished the RT runs on hera (all 12 tests passed) and committed the
resulting log files. Please let me know if you want me to commit your log
files from wcoss and orion.
Thanks,
Shan
On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 4:47 PM Shan Sun - NOAA Federal <shan.sun@noaa.gov>
wrote:
… Hi Jun,
Ok. It is compiling now. I will commit the log files tonight when all the
tests are done.
Thanks,
Shan
On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 3:33 PM Jun Wang ***@***.***> wrote:
> Shan, let's rerun the full RT.
>
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 5:26 PM Denise Worthen ***@***.***>
> wrote:
>
> > ***@***.**** approved this pull request.
> >
> > —
> > You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> > <
> #196 (review)
> >,
> > or unsubscribe
> > <
> https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AI7D6TMHUAM5ZR4MDLSJL4DSJYU5LANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q
> >
> > .
> >
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <#196 (comment)>,
> or unsubscribe
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALORMVV2N6FG2RHUAYG7ZXTSJYVYRANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q>
> .
>
|
|
Shan,
Please copy wcoss/orion log files
at: /scratch1/NCEPDEV/nems/Jun.Wang/nems/s2s/20201005/.
…On Fri, Oct 9, 2020 at 12:47 AM shansun6 ***@***.***> wrote:
Hi Jun,
I have finished the RT runs on hera (all 12 tests passed) and committed the
resulting log files. Please let me know if you want me to commit your log
files from wcoss and orion.
Thanks,
Shan
On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 4:47 PM Shan Sun - NOAA Federal ***@***.***>
wrote:
> Hi Jun,
>
> Ok. It is compiling now. I will commit the log files tonight when all the
> tests are done.
>
> Thanks,
> Shan
>
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 3:33 PM Jun Wang ***@***.***>
wrote:
>
>> Shan, let's rerun the full RT.
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 5:26 PM Denise Worthen ***@***.***
>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > ***@***.**** approved this pull request.
>> >
>> > —
>> > You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
>> > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
>> > <
>>
#196 (review)
>> >,
>> > or unsubscribe
>> > <
>>
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AI7D6TMHUAM5ZR4MDLSJL4DSJYU5LANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q
>> >
>> > .
>> >
>>
>> —
>> You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
>> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
>> <
#196 (comment)
>,
>> or unsubscribe
>> <
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALORMVV2N6FG2RHUAYG7ZXTSJYVYRANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q
>
>> .
>>
>
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#196 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AI7D6TPKAZPBNMMJF2XA6ALSJ2IU3ANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q>
.
|
|
Hi Jun,
Could you please give me the read permission for the 2 orion files?
40 -rw-r----- 1 Jun.Wang nems 36980 Oct 9 02:18
RegressionTests_orion.intel.log
6584 -rw-r----- 1 Jun.Wang nems 6741657 Oct 9 02:18
Compile_orion.intel.log
40 -rw-r--r-- 1 Jun.Wang nems 37244 Oct 9 11:43
RegressionTests_wcoss_dell_p3.log
6764 -rw-r--r-- 1 Jun.Wang nems 6924724 Oct 9 11:43
Compile_wcoss_dell_p3.log
Thanks,
Shan
…On Fri, Oct 9, 2020 at 5:46 AM Jun Wang ***@***.***> wrote:
Shan,
Please copy wcoss/orion log files
at: /scratch1/NCEPDEV/nems/Jun.Wang/nems/s2s/20201005/.
On Fri, Oct 9, 2020 at 12:47 AM shansun6 ***@***.***> wrote:
> Hi Jun,
>
> I have finished the RT runs on hera (all 12 tests passed) and committed
the
> resulting log files. Please let me know if you want me to commit your log
> files from wcoss and orion.
>
> Thanks,
> Shan
>
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 4:47 PM Shan Sun - NOAA Federal <
***@***.***>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Jun,
> >
> > Ok. It is compiling now. I will commit the log files tonight when all
the
> > tests are done.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Shan
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 3:33 PM Jun Wang ***@***.***>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Shan, let's rerun the full RT.
> >>
> >> On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 5:26 PM Denise Worthen <
***@***.***
> >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > ***@***.**** approved this pull request.
> >> >
> >> > —
> >> > You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> >> > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> >> > <
> >>
>
#196 (review)
> >> >,
> >> > or unsubscribe
> >> > <
> >>
>
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AI7D6TMHUAM5ZR4MDLSJL4DSJYU5LANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q
> >> >
> >> > .
> >> >
> >>
> >> —
> >> You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
> >> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> >> <
>
#196 (comment)
> >,
> >> or unsubscribe
> >> <
>
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALORMVV2N6FG2RHUAYG7ZXTSJYVYRANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q
> >
> >> .
> >>
> >
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <
#196 (comment)
>,
> or unsubscribe
> <
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AI7D6TPKAZPBNMMJF2XA6ALSJ2IU3ANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q
>
> .
>
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#196 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALORMVQW5OVYO2XPN7PHA5DSJ3ZYZANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q>
.
|
|
Sorry, changed permission. Please try again.
…On Fri, Oct 9, 2020 at 9:46 AM shansun6 ***@***.***> wrote:
Hi Jun,
Could you please give me the read permission for the 2 orion files?
40 -rw-r----- 1 Jun.Wang nems 36980 Oct 9 02:18
RegressionTests_orion.intel.log
6584 -rw-r----- 1 Jun.Wang nems 6741657 Oct 9 02:18
Compile_orion.intel.log
40 -rw-r--r-- 1 Jun.Wang nems 37244 Oct 9 11:43
RegressionTests_wcoss_dell_p3.log
6764 -rw-r--r-- 1 Jun.Wang nems 6924724 Oct 9 11:43
Compile_wcoss_dell_p3.log
Thanks,
Shan
On Fri, Oct 9, 2020 at 5:46 AM Jun Wang ***@***.***> wrote:
> Shan,
> Please copy wcoss/orion log files
> at: /scratch1/NCEPDEV/nems/Jun.Wang/nems/s2s/20201005/.
>
> On Fri, Oct 9, 2020 at 12:47 AM shansun6 ***@***.***>
wrote:
>
> > Hi Jun,
> >
> > I have finished the RT runs on hera (all 12 tests passed) and committed
> the
> > resulting log files. Please let me know if you want me to commit your
log
> > files from wcoss and orion.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Shan
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 4:47 PM Shan Sun - NOAA Federal <
> ***@***.***>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Jun,
> > >
> > > Ok. It is compiling now. I will commit the log files tonight when all
> the
> > > tests are done.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Shan
> > >
> > > On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 3:33 PM Jun Wang ***@***.***>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Shan, let's rerun the full RT.
> > >>
> > >> On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 5:26 PM Denise Worthen <
> ***@***.***
> > >
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > ***@***.**** approved this pull request.
> > >> >
> > >> > —
> > >> > You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> > >> > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> > >> > <
> > >>
> >
>
#196 (review)
> > >> >,
> > >> > or unsubscribe
> > >> > <
> > >>
> >
>
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AI7D6TMHUAM5ZR4MDLSJL4DSJYU5LANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q
> > >> >
> > >> > .
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> —
> > >> You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
> > >> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> > >> <
> >
>
#196 (comment)
> > >,
> > >> or unsubscribe
> > >> <
> >
>
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALORMVV2N6FG2RHUAYG7ZXTSJYVYRANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q
> > >
> > >> .
> > >>
> > >
> >
> > —
> > You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> > <
>
#196 (comment)
> >,
> > or unsubscribe
> > <
>
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AI7D6TPKAZPBNMMJF2XA6ALSJ2IU3ANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q
> >
> > .
> >
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <
#196 (comment)
>,
> or unsubscribe
> <
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALORMVQW5OVYO2XPN7PHA5DSJ3ZYZANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q
>
> .
>
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#196 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AI7D6TPZTCFQKJODSYXDFKLSJ4H3LANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q>
.
|
|
Thanks, Jun. I have committed the 4 log files from you to my branch.
Shan
…On Fri, Oct 9, 2020 at 9:18 AM Jun Wang ***@***.***> wrote:
Sorry, changed permission. Please try again.
On Fri, Oct 9, 2020 at 9:46 AM shansun6 ***@***.***> wrote:
> Hi Jun,
>
> Could you please give me the read permission for the 2 orion files?
>
> 40 -rw-r----- 1 Jun.Wang nems 36980 Oct 9 02:18
> RegressionTests_orion.intel.log
> 6584 -rw-r----- 1 Jun.Wang nems 6741657 Oct 9 02:18
> Compile_orion.intel.log
> 40 -rw-r--r-- 1 Jun.Wang nems 37244 Oct 9 11:43
> RegressionTests_wcoss_dell_p3.log
> 6764 -rw-r--r-- 1 Jun.Wang nems 6924724 Oct 9 11:43
> Compile_wcoss_dell_p3.log
>
> Thanks,
> Shan
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 9, 2020 at 5:46 AM Jun Wang ***@***.***>
wrote:
>
> > Shan,
> > Please copy wcoss/orion log files
> > at: /scratch1/NCEPDEV/nems/Jun.Wang/nems/s2s/20201005/.
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 9, 2020 at 12:47 AM shansun6 ***@***.***>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Jun,
> > >
> > > I have finished the RT runs on hera (all 12 tests passed) and
committed
> > the
> > > resulting log files. Please let me know if you want me to commit your
> log
> > > files from wcoss and orion.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Shan
> > >
> > > On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 4:47 PM Shan Sun - NOAA Federal <
> > ***@***.***>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Jun,
> > > >
> > > > Ok. It is compiling now. I will commit the log files tonight when
all
> > the
> > > > tests are done.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Shan
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 3:33 PM Jun Wang ***@***.***>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Shan, let's rerun the full RT.
> > > >>
> > > >> On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 5:26 PM Denise Worthen <
> > ***@***.***
> > > >
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > ***@***.**** approved this pull request.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > —
> > > >> > You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> > > >> > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> > > >> > <
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>
#196 (review)
> > > >> >,
> > > >> > or unsubscribe
> > > >> > <
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AI7D6TMHUAM5ZR4MDLSJL4DSJYU5LANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q
> > > >> >
> > > >> > .
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >> —
> > > >> You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
> > > >> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> > > >> <
> > >
> >
>
#196 (comment)
> > > >,
> > > >> or unsubscribe
> > > >> <
> > >
> >
>
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALORMVV2N6FG2RHUAYG7ZXTSJYVYRANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q
> > > >
> > > >> .
> > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> > > —
> > > You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> > > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> > > <
> >
>
#196 (comment)
> > >,
> > > or unsubscribe
> > > <
> >
>
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AI7D6TPKAZPBNMMJF2XA6ALSJ2IU3ANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q
> > >
> > > .
> > >
> >
> > —
> > You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
> > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> > <
>
#196 (comment)
> >,
> > or unsubscribe
> > <
>
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALORMVQW5OVYO2XPN7PHA5DSJ3ZYZANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q
> >
> > .
> >
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <
#196 (comment)
>,
> or unsubscribe
> <
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AI7D6TPZTCFQKJODSYXDFKLSJ4H3LANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q
>
> .
>
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#196 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALORMVRG4IF5IWIEV6PVGATSJ4SURANCNFSM4RXRMY5Q>
.
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is regarding Issue #178.
A test at C384 and 0.25deg ocean using a fractional land mask is added, based on the develop branch of /ufs-community/ufs-s2s-model/ on Sept. 22, 2020 (94a4cc6).
Testing was performed on Hera and the model output is at /scratch2/BMC/gsd-fv3-dev/Shan.Sun/S2S_RT/rt_192127/.
Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks!
@DeniseWorthen @junwang-noaa