Skip to content

Re-introduced the option to turn off comparison with ACMEv0 pre-processed data #25

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

Merged

Conversation

milenaveneziani
Copy link
Collaborator

  • Changed scripts (including the run script and the config file) to optionally skip the visualization of pre-processed ACME-v0 data.
  • Added config.analysis_* and config.analysis.* to .gitignore.

…re-processed results.

Added config.analysis_* and config.analysis.* to .gitignore.
@milenaveneziani
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I tested this on edison, using the usual ACME v1 run results, by first setting ref_case_v0 equal to the ACME-v0 case for which I have data available. The results were bfb with respect to the previous run made with the old code. I then set ref_case_v0=None, and the script ran smoothly again, producing the plots without the ACME-v0 results, as expected.

@milenaveneziani
Copy link
Collaborator Author

milenaveneziani commented Sep 21, 2016

I also tested this successfully on wolf, using a 2-year QU_480km test case that @mark-petersen ran in standalone MPAS-O. This is also relevant in the sense that the framework works for single MPAS components (turning off the bits of the code that are not relevant to the particular standalone run, of course).
Here are two timeseries plots:
ohc_global_qu_480km
sst_global_qu_480km

If someone is willing to take a look at the python changes introduced here, I think this PR could be ready to merge. Unless we want to test the git submodule thing with the ACME PreAndPostProcessing repo first. What do you think @mark-petersen?

@xylar
Copy link
Collaborator

xylar commented Sep 22, 2016

@mark-petersen, I've assigned you to review this PR. Let me know if you're too busy and maybe @pwolfram or I can do it instead. But I'm assuming you can coordinate best with @milenaveneziani how these changes get pulled into the ACME PreAndPostProcessingScripts repo.

@mark-petersen mark-petersen merged commit 6754678 into MPAS-Dev:master Sep 23, 2016
@mark-petersen
Copy link
Collaborator

Great. I was able to modify a few lines in the configure script to point to my directories. It ran and made the SST plot above the first time I tried it. Beautiful! Thanks everyone for your work on this.

@mark-petersen
Copy link
Collaborator

@milenaveneziani I usually delete the branch of the person who made the pull request. It looks like I don't have permission to do that for you:

wf-fe2.lanl.gov> git push milena :milena/fix_compare_ocnice_tov0
To [email protected]:milenaveneziani/MPAS-Analysis.git
 ! [remote rejected] milena/fix_compare_ocnice_tov0 (permission denied)
error: failed to push some refs to '[email protected]:milenaveneziani/MPAS-Analysis.git'

@milenaveneziani milenaveneziani deleted the milena/fix_compare_ocnice_tov0 branch September 23, 2016 15:53
@milenaveneziani
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Thanks @mark-petersen! I don't know how to change the permissions, but I deleted the branch.
Glad it worked out fine.

@xylar
Copy link
Collaborator

xylar commented Sep 23, 2016

@mark-petersen and @milenaveneziani, I think the permissions of the repo are such that we're not allowed to delete (or otherwise modify) each other's forks. Perhaps that's because this is a public repo? Doug would know... ;-p

@douglasjacobsen
Copy link
Member

@xylar Yup, you're definitely correct. Public fork repos are owned by the person who forked, rather than the organziation (like private fork repos).

You can add collaborators (and maybe teams?) to the fork, but typically you would just ask the owner to delete them.

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.

4 participants