Scheduled Downtime
On Tuesday 24 October 2023 @ 5pm MT the forums will be in read only mode in preparation for the downtime. On Wednesday 25 October 2023 @ 5am MT, this website will be down for maintenance and expected to return online later in the morning.
Normal Operations
The forums are back online with normal operations. If you notice any issues or errors related to the forums, please reach out to help@ucar.edu

Anyone able to run a 'B_RCP4.5_WACCM_CN' case at f09_g16 resolution?

Hi everyone,

I'm trying to track down an issue with a B_RCP4.5_WACCM_CN run with the 1-degree (f09_g16) resolution. I see that it's not an officially supported resolution now, but wondered if anyone has gotten it to work? There must be some sort of bounds issue in the code itself since the failures occur in very non-standard way (eg, failures in compiler libraries rather than in parts of the CESM code, or so it seems). I haven't tried with bounds checking yet.

I'll dig a bit more into it and try to trace where the error is happening, but if this is a really foolish idea since it isn't supported, a few words to that effect would be greatly appreciated.

(Note: The 2-degree works fine.)

Cheers,
- Brian
 

jedwards

CSEG and Liaisons
Staff member
It sounds like you are describing a compiler failure but you didn't tell us what compiler or machine you are trying to use.

Seems like it may be a foolish idea, there is no initial file for that compset and resolution, so even if you complete the build you are going to continue to have problems.
 
Hi Jim,

I actually think it might be a code issue - perhaps with array bounds? I leaned towards a compiler issue in the beginning (Intel 12.1) but switched to PGI and got the exact same kind of error - internal to a memcpy, I believe, which is the strange bit. I haven't yet tried 'gfortran', nor investigated more deeply the issue. I was really just curious if anyone else has run this on any other system, especially x86-based ones.

Also, this happened while running - we were testing via setting RUN_STARTDATE to 2000-02-01 which gives you the 'cami_2000-02-01_0.9x1.25_L66_c040928.nc' file for initial conditions, I think. Is this a very bad idea for some reason?

Thanks,
- Brian
 
Top