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

Issue with ./case.build

jzweifel

jzweifel
Member
Hi all,

I'm working on an experiment where I have ran a control simulation 50 years and am now trying to go back to implement a forcing related to sulfur dioxide emissions.

To do this, I created 20 cloned cases from my control simulation and am now trying to run them from June from year 0031-0050 respectively. Before I try to write a script to automate this process, I wanted to try and do this manually. Here are the runtime variables I have set in a case called clone_1.

Results in group run_begin_stop_restart
CONTINUE_RUN: TRUE
ESP_RUN_ON_PAUSE: FALSE
RESUBMIT_SETS_CONTINUE_RUN: TRUE
RUN_REFCASE: control_F2000
RUN_REFDATE: 0031-06-01
RUN_REFDIR: /glade/derecho/scratch/jzweifel/archive/control_F2000/rest/next_20_years/june_rests/0031-06-01-00000
RUN_REFTOD: 00000
RUN_STARTDATE: 0031-06-01
RUN_TYPE: hyrbid


Ideally I would want this clone_1 model to simulate starting from the base conditions of control_F2000 as they were in 0031-06-01. Would this combination of variables achieve that goal?

I thought they would and I tried to then use ./case.build on clone_1 and am getting the following feedback:

jzweifel@derecho3:/glade/work/jzweifel/cases/clone_1> ./case.build Building case in directory /glade/work/jzweifel/cases/clone_1 sharedlib_only is False model_only is False File /glade/work/jzweifel/cases/clone_1/LockedFiles/env_build.xml has been modified Generating component namelists as part of build Creating component namelists Calling /glade/work/jzweifel/cases/derecho_cesm_sandbox/cime/../components/cam//cime_config/buildnml ...calling cam buildcpp to set build time options

This ./case.build is taking much much longer than before and hasn't moved on from this message in hours. I get the sense that something must be incorrect. Would anyone be able to help me with this?

Thanks so much for all the help in the past/present/future!

Jack
 

jzweifel

jzweifel
Member
Hi all, something is definitely incorrect with my clone_1 case that I am trying run, yesterday before leaving my office I tried running: nohup ./case.build & to try and let my case build while I was away from my/cesm machines. The case still did not finish building and was stuck at the above.

Unfortunately I also got this email just a few minutes ago from UCAR:

A violation of the usage policy by jzweifel (Jack Zweifel,UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN AT MADISON) on derecho4 was automatically detected starting at 09:40 on 02/29.

I immediately killed that case.build in response!

I'm still really not sure why this is happening, but here are a few of my thoughts:

a) my xml variables are not configured correctly to get my clone_1 to initialize from 0031-06-01 from control_F2000 and run for 3 more months now with the sulfur dioxide forcing I inputed into its user_nl_cam.

b) Also in my user_nl_cam I tried to add more output variables using the fincl method I found... maybe this is somehow messing something up.

c) when I used to do work on Cheyenne and wanted to build a case I would call qcmd -- ./case.build, this always worked well, but when I tried to build a case my first time on Derecho I tried using that method and couldn't progress forward. My thought was just that Derecho being a new machine maybe didn't require the qcmd preamble, so I had just been using ./case.build directly, it had worked just fine for my other cases. Maybe I was incorrect here and I should still be using qcmd first. I just tried it now and got this feedback:

jzweifel@derecho4:/glade/work/jzweifel/cases/clone_1> qcmd -- ./case.build Error: no project provided as argument or via PBS_ACCOUNT

I'm a little confused on that error and don't know how to get around it. And even if I did, I still have a suspicion that something else is incorrectly configured in my case.

Any help would be appreciated, I think once I get this case figured out and running smoothly I'll be good to move on to repeating the process with my other clones!

Thanks again!

Jack
 
Top