[MITgcm-devel] updates on seaice code consolidation

Thu Dec 9 18:26:09 EST 2010

Thank you Matt.

So Gael, this means you can go ahead and nuke (send to archive) 
MITgcm/pkg/ seaice/*_if

We will get back to you soon regarding remaining *_if stuff that
need to be brought over from MITgcm_contrib/ifenty

Matt, to answer your questions, the default forward ECCO2
configuration is here:
http://mitgcm.org/viewvc/MITgcm/MITgcm_contrib/high_res_cube/

See
http://mitgcm.org/viewvc/MITgcm/MITgcm_contrib/high_res_cube/README.cs510
for details.

The default adjoint configuration is here:
http://mitgcm.org/viewvc/MITgcm/MITgcm_contrib/high_res_cube/cs510_adjoint/

Let me or Hong know if you have any questions regarding above two configurations.

Cheers, Dimitris

Dimitris Menemenlis <menemenlis at jpl.nasa.gov>
Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology
MS 300-323, 4800 Oak Grove Dr, Pasadena CA 91109-8099, USA
tel: 818-354-1656;  cell: 818-625-6498;  fax: 818-393-6720

On Dec 9, 2010, at 2:25 PM, Matthew Mazloff wrote:

> Hi Dimitris,
> 
> I am using the ones in pkg/seaice
> 
> Yes, I am fine with removing *_if.  Do I simply remove
> #define SEAICE_ALLOW_TD_IF
> from SEAICE_OPTIONS.h
> or is there more you recommend?  Can you point me in the direction of  
> the parameters and flags you are using in ECCO2?  Specifically it  
> would be great to see what you are using for:
> SEAICE.h
> SEAICE_OPTIONS.h
> data.seaice
> 
> Thanks
> Matt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Dec 9, 2010, at 2:05 PM, Menemenlis, Dimitris (3248) wrote:
> 
>> Matt, two specific questions to you: which *_if code are you using?  
>> Is it the one in pkg/seaice or the one in MITgcm_contrib?
>> 
>> If it is the former, are you satisfied that we can now remove pkg/ 
>> seaice/*_if from repository since this code has now been been merged  
>> in the main pkg/seaice routines by Gael?
>> 
>> Dimitris Menemenlis
>> 818-625-6498
>> 
>> On Dec 9, 2010, at 1:24 PM, "Patrick Heimbach" <heimbach at MIT.EDU>  
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi there,
>>> 
>>> I am summarizing a brief telecon which we had today between
>>> JPL (Dimitris, Ian, An) and MIT (Gael, Jean-Michel, myself).
>>> 
>>> Our goal is (has been for a while) to
>>> * incorporate Ian's changes into "main" code
>>> * clean up code
>>> * be able to get rid of the _if versions in pkg/seaice (and  
>>> MITgcm_contrib/ )
>>> 
>>> The status as of September was:
>>> * the "legacy" code in pkg/seaice
>>> * the "_if" code in pkg/seaice
>>> * latest code from Ian in MITgcm_contrib (at my request) for the  
>>> purpose of merging with code in pkg/seaice
>>> 
>>> At the time of Martin's and Dimitris' visit we had hoped to be able  
>>> to
>>> run the MITgcm_contrib/ code, but attempts by several people to do so
>>> failed despite repeated iterations of fixes.
>>> Moving forward we had formulated a strategy at MIT to
>>> get a code that
>>> 1. tries to incorporate Ian's modifs,
>>> 2. do so in a controlled way (traceable via CVS),
>>> 3. cleans up many of the issues of legacy code (yneg, and many  
>>> other issues)
>>> 5. a cleaned-up sequence that is more amenable to modularization,  
>>> e.g. for coupling
>>> (e.g. move age calculations and similar to separate routines,
>>> deal with salinity code and salt_plume params),
>>> 5. solves non-conservation issues.
>>> 
>>> Main work on 1.-4. was taken on by Gael, and item 5. tackled by  
>>> Martin.
>>> As far as I understand, starting point for Gael's merge was the  
>>> "legacy"
>>> code with main merges taken from _if routines.
>>> 
>>> I guess this has gone a long way, but
>>> in order to bring it to successful completion we have the following  
>>> issues:
>>> 1. extent to which code improvements in Ian's MITgcm_contrib are  
>>> still missing
>>> (Ian voiced concerns that some important terms described in his  
>>> thesis
>>> as adapted from McPhee are still missing)
>>> 2. make sure that major setups that we are aware of run  
>>> "successfully"
>>> with the latest code, so that we can complete the clean-up
>>> 
>>> To deal with 1. Ian has agreed to document what pieces are still  
>>> missing
>>> (forthcoming on mitgcm-devel).
>>> 
>>> To deal with 2. some of the major setups need to re-run (and  
>>> retuned?).
>>> Especially, Matt who's probably the only one having used the _if code
>>> (I lost track which one) should re-run SOSE and see if he's happy  
>>> with "latest code".
>>> Suggestion is that this be done with the next checkpoint (c62p).
>>> "full list of setups are:
>>> * Matt: SOSE
>>> * Dimitris/Hong: ECCO2
>>> * An/Gunnar: Arctic
>>> * Gael/Patrick: ECCO-GODAE codes
>>> * Holly: Atlantic setup
>>> * Martin: his setup(s)
>>> * Ian: Lab Sea setup, with special focus on adjoint behaviour
>>> 
>>> Hope I captured it all, not too confusing and not too inaccurate.
>>> Cheers
>>> -Patrick
>>> 
>>> ---
>>> Patrick Heimbach | heimbach at mit.edu | http://www.mit.edu/~heimbach
>>> MIT | EAPS 54-1518 | 77 Massachusetts Ave | Cambridge MA 02139 USA
>>> FON +1-617-253-5259 | FAX +1-617-253-4464 | SKYPE patrick.heimbach
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> MITgcm-devel mailing list
> MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel