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

In GEOSldas, use only a sparse checkout of GEOS_Util? #708

Closed
gmao-rreichle opened this issue Feb 14, 2024 · 3 comments
Closed

In GEOSldas, use only a sparse checkout of GEOS_Util? #708

gmao-rreichle opened this issue Feb 14, 2024 · 3 comments
Assignees
Labels
0-diff trivial very, very obvious 0-diff change infrastructure

Comments

@gmao-rreichle
Copy link
Contributor

@weiyuan-jiang : When running GEOSldas parallel_build.csh, mepo init tends to take a long time when it is getting the external GEOS_Util repo. The latter consists of >1,000 files, and we probably only need a handful (pre/remap_restart/*). For reference, the entire GEOSldas (incl external repos) consists of ~4,000 files.
I might have miscounted, and I might be missing something else we need from GEOS_Util besides remap_restart.py. But it's worth a try to see if we can do a sparse checkout for GEOS_Util. When you get a chance, can you please take a look? Thanks!

cc: @biljanaorescanin

@weiyuan-jiang
Copy link
Contributor

After we have tag from GEOS_Uti, this PR can have sparse checkout of GEOS_Util.
Do we need sparse checkout of GMAO_Share? @gmao-rreichle

@gmao-rreichle
Copy link
Contributor Author

Do we need sparse checkout of GMAO_Share? @gmao-rreichle

Maybe. I didn't look into the size of what we need relative to the total size of GMAO_Shared. Something to look into. Maybe just run mepo intialize and see if any repo other than GEOS_Util slows things down

@gmao-rreichle
Copy link
Contributor Author

addressed in #711

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
0-diff trivial very, very obvious 0-diff change infrastructure
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants