-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 317
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
Create new surface datasets, CTSM5.2 branch #1903
Comments
@ekluzek you asked about the space that the current list of files takes. I typed |
Along with this, @slevis-lmwg or @olyson were you going to prepare a list of all the grids, resolutions, & time periods we're supporting (along with their approximate file size). I need some kind of list to bring to co-chairs to have a discussion on file creation and storage. Second question, I though part of the feature of the new mksurfdataESMF was that we'd have the ability to do mapping 'on the fly' or at runtime, especially for high resolution or variable resolution grids. Is this still a feature of the system that we should highlight? |
|
On the second question, the answer is no, such a feature does not exist at this time. My understanding is that for files and timeseries that take up huge amounts of disk space, we will not make the files ahead of time. Rather they will be generated on an as needed basis. |
Current ctsm5.2 list of surface and landuse datasets with file sizes: |
Let's talk about this some in our software meeting tomorrow. It would be good to be on the same page about this in terms of what datasets to create. Part of the reason to only produce a 1850-2100 landuse timeseries file for most resolutions is that you can use it for both historical, for future scenarios, AND for present day where you need data after 2015. This means you have one file that can be used for those three different purposes and you don't have to have a different file for each. @wwieder I think the answer for you is "yes" the mapping is done on the fly in mksurfdata_esmf, whereas mksurfdata_map required you to create mapping files first as a separate step that you do before running mksurfdata_map. Hence, the CTSM5.2 branch removes the mkmapdata script from the tools directory. All that's needed to support a new grid to run CTSM at is a mesh file for that grid. Does that answer the question you are asking? |
@wwieder my response differs from Erik's because I assumed you meant "at runtime" as in during a CTSM simulation. |
Update after this morning's SE meeting (please let me know if you catch errors):
New ctsm5.2 list of surface and landuse datasets with file sizes: |
In the cheyenne test-suite, this test fails Answer is YES to f10: I changed the grid in testlist_clm.xml for this test. Regarding the 4x5 grid:
Answers:
This test fails Answer is YES, generate landuse timeseries for C96: I updated gen_mksurfdata_jobscript_multi.py and mksurfdata_jobscript_multi_master. I'm generating the C96 landuse file. I will need to move it to .../inputdata/... These tests fail Answer is YES, use_init_interp = .true. for now, and later we will generate new finidat files for these tests. A couple more tests fail, but I will leave them for later. |
@ekluzek in today's meeting we discussed C96 for 1850-2015 because we have a test for that period, so I'm generating the landuse file. A follow-up question is whether I should generate C96 files for the SSPs, too, even though we do not have corresponding tests. |
@slevis-lmwg I recommend that for resolutions that we create historical landuse timeseries files, that we create SSP5-8.5 and allow users to use that one file for both historical and SSP5-8.5 simulations. We should do all of the SSP scenarios for only a limited set of resolutions. f10, 1-deg and 2-deg for sure for example. |
Last checkbox checked in this issue. See https://github.com/ESCOMP/CTSM/projects/36 for project status. |
Includes surface dataset project #1873, and #1868, as well as significant changes to mksurfdata_esmf (e.g. #1791) gross unrepresented land use transition #309, dynamic urban datasets #1157, and more...
The next step waits for merge of #2318. Details in this card on the project board.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: