search

ESCOMP / CISM

Community Ice Sheet Model
GNU Lesser General Public License v3.0
6 stars 11 forks source link

If no problem type is specified in .config file, "EISMINT" error occurs #10

Open billsacks opened 6 years ago

billsacks commented 6 years ago

From @matthewhoffman on July 28, 2015 15:23

If no problem type is specified in the .config file, CISM aborts with: FATAL ERROR : No EISMINT forcing selected

There is no documentation for how a user should set up a user-defined simulation that is not one of the canned test cases. The modules that parse the .config file look for different domain types as a config section in square brackets. For instance, an EISMINT-2 test has a [EISMINT-2] section (with some items beneath it), a dome test has a [DOME-TEST] section (with no items beneath it). Currently the code is expecting one of these problem types to be specified, and if one isn't then it throws the error "FATAL ERROR : No EISMINT forcing selected".

A workaround for running a user-defined problem is to add the line: [DOME-TEST] to the .config file. The dome test is a generic problem type and can be used for any user-defined simulations. This line simply tells CISM that nothing special needs to occur in setting up the problem. Ideally we should generalize this so that for a generic problem either 1) no problem type needs to be defined at all; or 2) we have something like a [GENERIC] problem type that makes it explicit that nothing unusual needs to occur inside the model set up.

Copied from original issue: E3SM-Project/cism-piscees#38

billsacks commented 6 years ago

From @whlipscomb on July 28, 2015 23:11

@matthewhoffman , I've never liked this old Glimmer feature. My preference would be (1): If no problem type is supplied by the user, then the model runs on without doing anything special.

billsacks commented 6 years ago

From @DanFMartin on July 29, 2015 4:52

I'd concur with Bill -- One of the issues we ran into when coupling CISM to BISICLES and running our own problems was figuring out what the problem type needed to be when we were setting up our own problems. At some point in the process, things changed under us, and I had to just try various problem types until I found one which worked again.

A generic problem type would have simplified that.

Dan

On 07/28/2015 04:11 PM, William Lipscomb wrote:

@matthewhoffman https://github.com/matthewhoffman , I've never liked this old Glimmer feature. My preference would be (1): If no problem type is supplied by the uses, then the model runs on without doing anything special.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/ACME-Climate/cism-piscees/issues/38#issuecomment-125778630.

Dan Martin email: DFMartin@lbl.gov Mail Stop 50A-1148 phone: (510) 495-2852 Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory fax: (510) 486-6900 1 Cyclotron Rd. Berkeley, CA 94720