Closed SamuelTrahanNOAA closed 2 weeks ago
@SamuelTrahanNOAA You might update UPP IDs 747,752,754 with
You might update UPP IDs 747,752,754 with
Is there any way that could break existing model workflows?
@SamuelTrahanNOAA No, the RRFS workflow has been using the branch 'release/rrfs_v1' aiming RRFS v1 implementation. Your PR will merged to the 'develop' branch for future implementations.
Okay. I'll update my branch to do what you suggest (merely rename the variables). Presently, I'm arguing with the inline post, trying to get it to run with the latest UPP. Your suggestion will be in the next round of testing.
Okay. I'll update my branch to do what you suggest (merely rename the variables). Presently, I'm arguing with the inline post, trying to get it to run with the latest UPP. Your suggestion will be in the next round of testing.
@SamuelTrahanNOAA There might be more efforts to get inline post working at UFS side with the latest UPP, e.g. g2tmpl, inline post interface. Let's get your changes working in offline post first. Thanks!
My changes already work in the offline post, and I have a fix for the inline post. I expect to have it working shortly, probably today.
@SamuelTrahanNOAA — Just wanted to say thanks for removing the unnecessary "GSD" prefixes from the number-concentration shortnames. My PR in Aug 2023 (https://github.com/NOAA-EMC/UPP/pull/758/) added the number concentrations to RRFS output, but I did not seize the opportunity to drop the "GSD" designations. Simplified code is always welcomed—thanks again!
The number concentration variables begin with "GSD_" which implies they're model-specific:
They're simply the number concentration. Nothing to do with GSD.
I suggest we add synonym variables (ie. NCRAIN_ON_HYBRIDLEVEL) and deprecate the GSD versions.@WenMeng-NOAA's preference is to rename the variables and not add synonyms. This will require updating model workflows to use new *.txt files with the correct names.