[MITgcm-devel] 3 time levels in seaice

[Martin Losch]

Jean-Michel,

I don't know what got into me, but this morning I wanted to do  
something useful but not immediately important, so I started doing all  
of these things. Go ahead and check in your stuff. I will wait and  
merge your new code with mine (shouldn't be hard, since I did not  
touch the I/O yet).

Then, if you agree, I'll make a tag tomorrow or even later, check-in  
my crap, then hope that Patrick can fix the adjoint if I really break  
it, and then we can worry about the pickups? (I guess it's enough to  
switch from rec_lev to rec_3d routines in reading and writing pickup  
files).

Martin

On Jun 17, 2009, at 3:53 PM, Jean-Michel Campin wrote:

> Hi Martin,
>
> I though we were going to keep those 3 levels field for some time
> so I changed the seaice_do_diags.F (and renamed it seaice_output.F)
> and am about to check-in this stuff (+ few other renaming in other  
> pkg).
> Would it make sense to wait a little bit for your seaice check-in
> until we are sure of what the adjoint and Patrick pathological
> set-up (seems silent for now) are going ?
>
> Apart from that, I think we only store level1 in pickup-files.
> + pickup_seaice has been switch to "clever pickup" so that even
> if you need to change the number of fields/levels, no need for an  
> other
> flag.
>
> Jean-Michel
>
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 02:42:51PM +0200, Martin Losch wrote:
>> Jean-Michel, Patrick
>>
>> I have started to get rid of the 3 time levels in pkg/seaice.
>> So far I am still using the old 3d fields in the code, but only  
>> level1.
>> This works fine; the next step will be to replace uice(:,:,3,:,:) etc
>> with uice(:,:,:,:), but that will require changing the pickup  
>> files. I am
>> not sure how to do that in order to be backward compatible. Is  
>> there a
>> way to tell from the meta files? Should I introduce a flag
>> useSeaicePickupPreCkpt?? and write code for these different cases?
>>
>> Further, the biggest problem was dealing with the old advect.F and
>> diffus.F routines. The most important application for these is the
>> adjoint (because the flux-limited schemes are not yet  
>> differentiated). I
>> had to change them quite a bit (among that removing the leap-frog  
>> code
>> that hopefully nobody uses), so i am afraid that I might have  
>> broken the
>> adjoint.
>>
>> Should I make a tag, check in the stuff that I have now, and let  
>> Patrick
>> fix the adjoint before we worry about the pickup files?
>>
>> Martin
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> MITgcm-devel mailing list
>> MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
>> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel
> _______________________________________________
> MITgcm-devel mailing list
> MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel