[MITgcm-devel] Re: [MITgcm-cvs] MITgcm/pkg/diagnostics CVS Commit

[Baylor Fox-Kemper]

> Are there any other issues or ideas that we ought to discuss before we
> implement this?  For instance, many netCDF tools (eg. NCO) support the
> concept of one or more "mask" variables.  Would it smarter (more
> efficient) for us to use a small number of mask variables rather than
> effectively embedding masks in a large number of fields using the
> missing_value feature?

Hi Ed,
   Using the masks as suggested would be a problem for Dmitris and  
others, where the masks themselves might present a storage problem.   
Using a separate mask means that we have to write fields twice, at  
least for one time in the case of steady masks or every timestep for  
time-variable masks as Andrea needs.  I see no advantage over a  
nicely implemented missing_value.
   -Baylor