Writing out the variables in the surface map data with the mksurfdata_map tools

[Yi Yao]

Dear all, recently I was trying to develop the mksurfdata_map tools, in order to generate the surface data map with a new variable. However, there are some problems while writing out the new variable. My variable is 3-Dimentional, so I have checked other 3-D variables. Normally in the source code of the modules, the dimension of the variables to be written would be (ns_o) X (number of the third dimension), where (ns_o) = (num_lon) x (num_lat). Although it's 2-D in the source code, it it can be written well into the 3-D variable in the surface data map with the function nf_put_vara_double(). Here is an example (output grid is 10 x 15):

This is the dimension of the variable in the output surface data map.

And here is the dimension of the array which is going to be written in the module. As you can see, 24 x 19 = 456. With the function nf_put_vara_double(), the variable was written into the output surface map.
However, in my case,

this is the dimension in the output surface data map,

and this is the dimension of the array which is going to be written. I used the function nf_put_vara_int(), but the error occurred ...
Does someone have a similar experience?

 

[oleson]

The error you're seeing suggests that the data being written is too large for the size of the dimensions which have been
specified (indicated by error -57). Not sure why that is happening but it possibly could be caused by the dimensions being switched?

 

[Yi Yao]

The error you're seeing suggests that the data being written is too large for the size of the dimensions which have been
specified (indicated by error -57). Not sure why that is happening but it possibly could be caused by the dimensions being switched?

I have transferred the variable from 2-D to 3-D, while this error still occurred.

This is how I get the dimension of the variabl specified in the output netcdf file, and the result is:

This is how I get the dimention of the array which is going to be written into the output file:

and the result is :

Finally I used this function:

But:

I am a little confused, as the dimensions are all got by Fortran, I don't think there is any issue about the place of different dimentions.
Do you have any idea?

 

[Yi Yao]

Dear, I just solved the bug by specifying the start and count, and I will check whether the variable has been written properly. I'll let you know.

 

[oleson]

I think you could also use nf_put_var_int (instead of nf_put_vara_int) and not have to specify the start and count?

 

[Yi Yao]

Thank you, it has been solved! I just didn't realize the difference between nf_put_vara and nf_put_var.