Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Exact Restart tests fail for 765 days #4722

Closed
ekluzek opened this issue Dec 18, 2024 · 2 comments · Fixed by #4723
Closed

Exact Restart tests fail for 765 days #4722

ekluzek opened this issue Dec 18, 2024 · 2 comments · Fixed by #4723
Labels
Responsibility: CESM Responsibility to manage and accomplish this issue is through CESM topic: tests tp: system tests user interface

Comments

@ekluzek
Copy link
Contributor

ekluzek commented Dec 18, 2024

In what will be ctsm5.3.016 I have two 765 day ER tests that fail due to the DRV_RESTART_POINTER file setting (off by a day) being wrong. This uses:

cime6.1.49
cmeps6.0.32

The full description of the case is here for CTSM.

ESCOMP/CTSM#2914

If the logic is wrong, there are likely other test lengths that will fail. But, there is a wide spectrum of test lengths that come with CTSM testing, so many/most must be fine.

@ekluzek ekluzek added Responsibility: CESM Responsibility to manage and accomplish this issue is through CESM tp: system tests user interface topic: tests labels Dec 18, 2024
@jedwards4b
Copy link
Contributor

Please indicate the name of the test so that I can reproduce. What calendar is it using?

@ekluzek
Copy link
Contributor Author

ekluzek commented Dec 19, 2024

Use this one:

ERP_P64x2_Ld765.f10_f10_mg37.I2000Clm60BgcCrop.derecho_intel.clm-monthly

It's using the default NO_LEAP calendar.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Responsibility: CESM Responsibility to manage and accomplish this issue is through CESM topic: tests tp: system tests user interface
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants