Open samsrabin opened 7 months ago
@samsrabin thank you for tracking this down. For now I'm fixing the failing test by adding PCT_OCEAN where it was missing. I will address this better (as you proposed) at a later time.
From SE meeting 2024-02-15: Let's make it fail in such a case.
Presently, it's possible to have an
fsurdat_modifier
config file with this specification:fsurdat_modifier
will happily set all those and leave the missing item,PCT_WETLAND
, alone. IfPCT_WETLAND
is nonzero anywhere on the original file, this will eventually cause a "weights do not sum to 100" error in the CESM run.fsurdat_modifier
only checks that the providedPCT_
variables sum to 100. I think it would make more sense for it to also fail if anyPCT_
variable is missing from the configuration file (if themodify_fsurdat_subgrid_fractions
section is present, that is). Is there a reason this isn't the case?For future-proofing,
fsurdat_modifier
could derivevalid_list
from the input surface dataset, rather than the list being hard-coded and needing an update with every CTSM version.(This arose in @slevis-lmwg's testing of the RXCROPMATURITY SystemTest with CTSM5.2, which splits
PCT_OCEAN
out ofPCT_WETLAND
. As you can see, RXCROPMATURITY didn't includePCT_OCEAN
.)