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

Update components.yaml to match GEOSgcm v10.22.1 (and update CI) #543

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Mar 21, 2022

Conversation

mathomp4
Copy link
Member

This PR updates ESMA_env, ESMA_cmake, and MAPL in the GEOSldas to match GEOSgcm v10.22.1. The changes are:

  • ESMA_env
    • Update to Baselibs 6.2.13 (v3.12.0)
    • Move to have both Python2 and Python3 loaded at the same time (v3.12.0)
    • Minor tweak to parallel_build.csh (v3.13.0)
  • ESMA_cmake
    • Updates for Spack support (v3.11.0)
    • Preliminary M1 support (v3.12.0)
  • MAPL

Of these, the ESMA_cmake is needed for build issues as GMAO_Shared main needs this version.

Note that there is a chance the MAPL update could be sort-of non-zero-diff. The issue is that Ops found some lats and lons in history output were of the sort of "6.500000000001" instead of "6.5". This MAPL update "fixes" that, and comparators like nccmp will see this as a difference. The data is zero-diff, but the lats and lons are not.

@mathomp4 mathomp4 self-assigned this Mar 21, 2022
@biljanaorescanin
Copy link
Contributor

I will test it now, thanks

@biljanaorescanin
Copy link
Contributor

biljanaorescanin commented Mar 21, 2022

Tests globalcs, aggglobalcs and gnuglobalcs fail for model and assim run comparison, for both collections ("lnd" and "lfs" ).
If we compare these tests without lat/lon files are identical. ( nccmp -dfsB -x lat,lon )

@biljanaorescanin biljanaorescanin marked this pull request as ready for review March 21, 2022 19:03
@biljanaorescanin biljanaorescanin requested review from a team as code owners March 21, 2022 19:03
@gmao-rreichle
Copy link
Contributor

Tests globalcs, aggglobalcs and gnuglobalcs fail for model and assim run comparison, for both collections ("lnd" and "lfs" ). If we compare these tests without lat/lon files are identical. ( nccmp -dfsB -x lat,lon )

How about the other tests (conus, global, cnclm[xx])? I assume you're implying that the other tests passed?

@biljanaorescanin
Copy link
Contributor

Yes, all other tests passed.

Runtype Clone Build Build Time Model Run/Compare Assim Run/Compare


conus pass pass 14 min pass/pass -- / --
global -- -- -- pass/pass pass/pass
globalcs -- -- -- pass/FAIL pass/FAIL
globalcnclm4 -- -- -- pass/pass -- / --
globalcnclm45 -- -- -- pass/pass -- / --
debugconus -- pass 5 min pass/pass -- / --
aggconus -- pass 15 min pass/pass -- / --
aggglobal -- -- -- pass/pass pass/pass
aggglobalcs -- -- -- pass/FAIL pass/FAIL
aggglobalcnclm4 -- -- -- pass/pass -- / --
aggglobalcnclm45 -- -- -- pass/pass -- / --
gnuconus pass pass 12 min pass/pass -- / --
gnuglobal -- -- -- pass/pass pass/pass
gnuglobalcs -- -- -- pass/FAIL pass/FAIL
gnuglobalcnclm4 -- -- -- pass/pass -- / --
gnuglobalcnclm45 -- -- -- pass/pass -- / --
gnudebugconus -- pass 10 min pass/pass -- / --

@gmao-rreichle gmao-rreichle merged commit 433ee5c into develop Mar 21, 2022
@gmao-rreichle gmao-rreichle deleted the feature/mathomp4/update-components-ldas branch March 21, 2022 19:10
@mathomp4
Copy link
Member Author

I know it's merged, but I think that makes sense that only the CS tests showed a difference.

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.

None yet

3 participants