Fixesmf

[dnadeau4]

No description provided.

[doutriaux1]

test suite fails.

[doutriaux1]

@dnadeau4 you're getting esmf 7.1.0 from their dev. I wonder if that's why. Can you try pushing the -c nesii/label/esmf-dev channel last? Thanks.

[durack1]

@dnadeau4 @doutriaux1 I heard mask, does this have anything to do with the weird Linux vs Linux vs Mac differences in the pmp?

[dnadeau4]

@durack1 I have not clue what you are talking about. Create an issue about it.
@doutriaux1 I changed the tests now that the mask can be set in ESMF. I have to assert the the value is masked and not 0.0. Also, Lina is using 4 VCS build in circleci so it might be ready tonight only.

[doutriaux1]

@dnadeau4 I see you're talking to @muryanto1 thanks.

[dnadeau4]

@doutriaux1 I did not change the channel order, but let's keep it this way until we find what is going on.

[durack1]

@dnadeau4 I thought you were aware of the issue - see PCMDI/pcmdi_metrics#303 and linked issues within that. In short, it seems when using masked results on Mac and linux (and now linux vs linux - @doutriaux1) values returned are considerable different, way larger than could be explained by precision-type issues across multiple platforms and hardware. @doutriaux1 can provide more context, but it's an issue that has been plaguing development for quite sometime

[doutriaux1]

@durack1 we need to come up with the streamlined script for @dnadeau4 we can't expect him to go through this complex code. @gleckler1 is working on this.

[gleckler1]

@dnadeau4 I have an example of where the ESMF conservative case is not doing things properly, under certain circumstances when masking is involved. ESMF linear seems ok. The example is with the PMP, which would be time consuming for you to get spun up on. Instead, I plan to write a short script reproducing the error with just a few CDAT commands. However, it will likely take me ~1hr to reproduce this and I may not have that this week. Alternatively, @dnadeau4 if you want me to explain the error to you and point you to the data we could take that approach. Come see me for that option, otherwise when I have a chance I will try to produce a clean script to reproduce the error.

[gleckler1]

@doutriaux1 I can now point you to an example with the PMP where the ESMF-conservative case with masking is giving erroneous results. On oceanonly, go to
/work/gleckler1/processed_data/metrics_package/metrics_results/cmip5clims_metrics_package-historical/e3sm_020118
The parameter file used for these calculations is in this directory. The best example of the problem is in ta-850_2.5x2.5_esmf_conservative_metrics.json
The rms_xyt values for all models should be ~<5C as in the linear and regrid2 cases (also in this directory). However, for some models there are errors >50C! If it would be helpful, we could run these tests and save the interpolated/masked climatologies to see if we can identify a coastline problem. The json files have provenance so you can see which version of CDMS was used.
FYI @dnadeau4