[MITgcm-devel] new verification experiment?

[Jean-Michel Campin]

Hi Martin,

I still prefer real*8 input file, it makes easier to unterstand 
where differences come from when something change, and/or
when doing comparaison between different compilers/platforms.
And it should not take too much disk space (at least, compared to
some other exp.).
But all the other things are very good.

Thanks,

Jean-Michel.

On Tue, Oct 11, 2005 at 08:12:55AM +0200, Martin Losch wrote:
> Hi,
> I found that if I use real*8 input files the results don't  change at 
> all (on my Apple PowerBook).
> However, I thought that I would at the same time add an open boundary 
> conditions for salinity, which is effectively a passive tracer as well, 
> this would change the results for salinity.
> 
> Also, why not have real*4 input fields, even if they change the 
> results? Will the results be more fragile across different platforms? I 
> don't think so. But real*4 would decrease the download-size.
> 
> My plan is to have the same open boundary condition for ptracer and 
> salinity at the western boundary and different conditions at the other 
> (salinity is set to sRef, while ptracer has this nearly homogeneous 
> v.Neumann condition.), just to show different options.
> 
> I'll go ahead and modify exp4 soon (this afternoon).
> 
> Martin
>