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

Flux partitioning #361

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 8, 2023
Merged

Flux partitioning #361

merged 1 commit into from
Aug 8, 2023

Conversation

LenkaNovak
Copy link
Collaborator

@LenkaNovak LenkaNovak commented Jul 26, 2023

Purpose

closes #360


  • I have read and checked the items on the review checklist.

@LenkaNovak LenkaNovak mentioned this pull request Jul 26, 2023
1 task
@LenkaNovak LenkaNovak marked this pull request as ready for review July 28, 2023 03:48
@valeriabarra
Copy link
Member

When reviewing the artifacts, should we compare this new CI job with the existing Slabplanet: non-monotonous surface remap or the Slabplanet: default one? The results look different from the default one, but identical to the non-monotonous, so I guess I know the answer to my question, but I just wanted to make sure

Project.toml Show resolved Hide resolved
experiments/AMIP/modular/cli_options.jl Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/FluxCalculator.jl Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/FluxCalculator.jl Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
test/Project.toml Show resolved Hide resolved
test/flux_calculator_tests.jl Show resolved Hide resolved
test/flux_calculator_tests.jl Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Member

@juliasloan25 juliasloan25 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nice work Lenka! My comments are mostly about adding comments/clarifications

.buildkite/pipeline.yml Show resolved Hide resolved
src/FluxCalculator.jl Show resolved Hide resolved
src/FieldExchanger.jl Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/FluxCalculator.jl Show resolved Hide resolved
src/FluxCalculator.jl Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
experiments/AMIP/modular/coupler_driver_modular.jl Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
experiments/AMIP/modular/coupler_driver_modular.jl Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
experiments/AMIP/modular/coupler_driver_modular.jl Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
experiments/AMIP/modular/coupler_driver_modular.jl Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Member

@juliasloan25 juliasloan25 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good! Thanks for the revision :) I only had a couple minor comments

Project.toml Show resolved Hide resolved
@@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ using ClimaCore

import ClimaCoupler.Interfacer: OceanModelSimulation, get_field, update_field!
import ClimaCoupler.FieldExchanger: step!, reinit!
import ClimaCoupler.FluxCalculator: update_turbulent_fluxes_point!, surface_thermo_state
Copy link
Member

@juliasloan25 juliasloan25 Aug 7, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should we remove the import here then?

test/flux_calculator_tests.jl Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@LenkaNovak
Copy link
Collaborator Author

LenkaNovak commented Aug 7, 2023

When reviewing the artifacts, should we compare this new CI job with the existing Slabplanet: non-monotonous surface remap or the Slabplanet: default one? The results look different from the default one, but identical to the non-monotonous, so I guess I know the answer to my question, but I just wanted to make sure

The Slabplanet: partitioned turbulent fluxes is expected to be different from both, e.g. see this energy check:

default
Screen Shot 2023-08-07 at 2 34 18 PM
nonmonotonous
Screen Shot 2023-08-07 at 2 33 06 PM
partitioned
Screen Shot 2023-08-07 at 2 32 51 PM

(perhaps not surprising that nonmonotonous and partitioned fluxes are closer together since they're both calculating fluxes at a higher resolution)

@LenkaNovak LenkaNovak force-pushed the ln/flux-partitioning2 branch 4 times, most recently from 1bb8fe7 to 78036ae Compare August 8, 2023 03:55
implemented in AMIP driver, conserving

deps

amip runs + custom sfc state

new pipeline run

clean up

clean up

revs

rev2

rev3

clean

format

codecov

code cov
@LenkaNovak LenkaNovak force-pushed the ln/flux-partitioning2 branch from 78036ae to 8ea4b6f Compare August 8, 2023 06:35
@LenkaNovak
Copy link
Collaborator Author

bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors bot commented Aug 8, 2023

Build succeeded!

The publicly hosted instance of bors-ng is deprecated and will go away soon.

If you want to self-host your own instance, instructions are here.
For more help, visit the forum.

If you want to switch to GitHub's built-in merge queue, visit their help page.

@bors bors bot merged commit 851b428 into main Aug 8, 2023
@bors bors bot deleted the ln/flux-partitioning2 branch August 8, 2023 17:27
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Flux partitioning
3 participants