Skip to content
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

Change visc_method default to avg_zeta #744

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 2, 2022

Conversation

apcraig
Copy link
Contributor

@apcraig apcraig commented Aug 2, 2022

PR checklist

  • Short (1 sentence) summary of your PR:
    Change visc_method default to avg_zeta, change alt07 to test avg_strength
  • Developer(s):
    apcraig
  • Suggest PR reviewers from list in the column to the right.
  • Please copy the PR test results link or provide a summary of testing completed below.
    full test suite on cheyenne indicates several failures with visc_method=avg_zeta that didn't failed with avg_strength, only for gridCD, no problem with gridB or gridC. https://github.com/CICE-Consortium/Test-Results/wiki/cice_by_hash_forks#063a7f2151ec20571d641af0552f4ea182acb9b6
  • How much do the PR code changes differ from the unmodified code?
    • bit for bit
    • different at roundoff level
    • more substantial, default visc_method change in gridC and gridCD
  • Does this PR create or have dependencies on Icepack or any other models?
    • Yes
    • No
  • Does this PR add any new test cases?
    • Yes
    • No, but changes default and alt07.
  • Is the documentation being updated? ("Documentation" includes information on the wiki or in the .rst files from doc/source/, which are used to create the online technical docs at https://readthedocs.org/projects/cice-consortium-cice/. A test build of the technical docs will be performed as part of the PR testing.)
    • Yes
    • No, does the documentation need to be updated at a later time?
      • Yes
      • No
  • Please provide any additional information or relevant details below:

Also update the suite.submit to not submit jobs that don't build successfully.

Several gridCD test cases fail with avg_zeta, but passed with avg_strength. gridCD is not validated yet, so I will let these fail for now.

FAIL cheyenne_intel_smoke_gbox80_2x2_boxwallblock_gridcd run -1 -1 -1
FAIL cheyenne_intel_smoke_gbox80_4x1_boxsyme_gridcd_kmtislands_run1day run -1 -1 -1
FAIL cheyenne_intel_smoke_gbox80_4x2_boxislandse_gridcd_run1day run -1 -1 -1
FAIL cheyenne_intel_smoke_gbox128_8x2_gridcd_reprosum_run10day run -1 -1 -1
FAIL cheyenne_intel_smoke_gbox128_8x1_cmplogrest_gridcd_reprosum_run10day_thread run -1 -1 -1
FAIL cheyenne_pgi_smoke_gbox80_2x2_boxwallblock_gridcd run -1 -1 -1
FAIL cheyenne_pgi_smoke_gbox80_4x1_boxsyme_gridcd_kmtislands_run1day run -1 -1 -1
FAIL cheyenne_pgi_smoke_gbox80_4x2_boxislandse_gridcd_run1day run -1 -1 -1
FAIL cheyenne_pgi_smoke_gx1_15x2_gridcd_reprosum_run10day_seabedprob run -1 -1 -1
FAIL cheyenne_pgi_smoke_gbox128_8x2_gridcd_reprosum_run10day run -1 -1 -1
FAIL cheyenne_pgi_smoke_gx1_18x1_cmplogrest_gridcd_reprosum_run10day_seabedprob_thread run -1 -1 -1
FAIL cheyenne_pgi_smoke_gbox128_8x1_cmplogrest_gridcd_reprosum_run10day_thread run -1 -1 -1
FAIL cheyenne_pgi_smoke_gx1_144x2_gx1prod_long_run10year run -1 -1 -1
FAIL cheyenne_gnu_smoke_gbox80_2x2_boxwallblock_gridcd run -1 -1 -1
FAIL cheyenne_gnu_smoke_gbox80_4x1_boxsyme_gridcd_kmtislands_run1day run -1 -1 -1
FAIL cheyenne_gnu_smoke_gbox80_4x2_boxislandse_gridcd_run1day run -1 -1 -1
FAIL cheyenne_gnu_smoke_gbox128_8x2_gridcd_reprosum_run10day run -1 -1 -1
FAIL cheyenne_gnu_smoke_gbox128_8x1_cmplogrest_gridcd_reprosum_run10day_thread run -1 -1 -1

echo "\$jobid \${ICE_TESTNAME} " >> ../suite.jobs
else if (\${dorun} == true) then
./cice.test
if (\$bldstat == 0) then
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you, I was wishing for this change last week!

@eclare108213 eclare108213 merged commit 731c61d into CICE-Consortium:main Aug 2, 2022
dabail10 pushed a commit to ESCOMP/CICE that referenced this pull request Oct 4, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants