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

[production/RRFS.v1] Reorganization of NWGES directory structure and removal of SLASH_ENSMEM_SUBDIR #365

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
May 14, 2024

Conversation

BenjaminBlake-NOAA
Copy link
Contributor

@BenjaminBlake-NOAA BenjaminBlake-NOAA commented May 9, 2024

DESCRIPTION OF CHANGES:

  • When I started working on reorganizing the run directory structure for the remaining DA tasks in the RRFS workflow, I realized that two things also need to be modified: the NWGES directory structure, and the removal of SLASH_ENSMEM_SUBDIR. This PR does that for the non-DA and firewx workflows to keep things simple.
  • The NWGES directories are re-structured to be more similar to COMOUT, so the cycle-specific directories are replaced by ${RUN}.${PDY}/${cyc} directories. The filenames in nwges will also contain ${PDY}${cyc} in them. To see an example of this on Cactus, you can look in /lfs/h2/emc/ptmp/Benjamin.Blake/test_nonDA_netcdf/nwges. In addition, $GESROOT is now used instead of ${NWGES} for the path to the nwges directory.
  • The SLASH_ENSMEM_SUBDIR variable is removed. If the task/directory is for an RRFS ensemble member, the member number will be incorporated into the directory name itself using the ${mem_num} variable.
  • Also included in this PR are the changes from PR Turn off FAA grib2 output for ensemble forecasts #353 which have not been added to production/RRFS.v1 yet (exrrfs_run_prdgen.sh changes).

TESTS CONDUCTED:

These changes were tested with the non-DA engineering test and the RRFS fire weather workflow.

Machines/Platforms:

  • WCOSS2
    • Cactus/Dogwood
    • Acorn
  • RDHPCS
    • Hera
    • Jet
    • Orion
    • Hercules

Test cases:

  • Engineering tests
    • Non-DA engineering test
    • DA engineering test
      • Retro
      • Ensemble
      • Parallel
  • RRFS fire weather
  • RRFS_A:
  • RRFS_B:
  • RTMA:
  • Others:

ISSUE:

@BenjaminBlake-NOAA
Copy link
Contributor Author

@MatthewPyle-NOAA Having a NWGES directory structure similar to COMOUT also makes sense to me if we want to go that route. So for example we could have directories within nwges like this instead of the current ${PDY}${cyc} directories:
rrfs.${PDY}/${cyc}
enkfrrfs.${PDY}/${cyc}
refs.${PDY}/${cyc}

@MatthewPyle-NOAA
Copy link
Contributor

@BenjaminBlake-NOAA I like that overall structure

@BenjaminBlake-NOAA
Copy link
Contributor Author

@MatthewPyle-NOAA Sounds good to me as well. I've updated my PR to reflect that structure and tested the changes.

@MatthewPyle-NOAA
Copy link
Contributor

FWIW, I do use a GESROOT definition in the HREF system. I know I was surprised that NCO doesn't really talk about it in the production standards - need to dig out some old e-mail conversations with Steven Earle about it. But in HREF I do stuff like:

export GESROOT=${GESROOT:-$(compath.py $envir/$NET/${href_ver})/nwges}

@BenjaminBlake-NOAA
Copy link
Contributor Author

I think using GESROOT makes sense and I'll change NWGES to GESROOT. The compath.py stuff can be added later but that should be the eventual goal.

Copy link
Contributor

@MatthewPyle-NOAA MatthewPyle-NOAA left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Generally looked good to me - but did have a comment about spinup cycles.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

One comment that applies to RUN_POST as well - I don't believe there are "spinup" cycles for the ensemble forecasts.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

You're right, thanks for catching that. I'll update those J-jobs.

@MatthewPyle-NOAA
Copy link
Contributor

@BenjaminBlake-NOAA Did you retest with your latest changes in this PR?

@BenjaminBlake-NOAA
Copy link
Contributor Author

@MatthewPyle-NOAA I did test the GESROOT changes and they worked well, but I didn't run any tests for the more recent spinup changes. Would you like me to run any more tests for those?

@MatthewPyle-NOAA
Copy link
Contributor

No need to run more tests at this point - will approve and get it merged.

Copy link
Contributor

@MatthewPyle-NOAA MatthewPyle-NOAA 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, but a complete test will require testing the full system. So will merge now so as not to hold things up.

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.

2 participants