New regional Panantarctic example #142
Conversation
|
The error that I get is copied below. |
|
what if you use the CPU and start julia with |
|
Thanks @simone-silvestri for the suggestion. Will try it now. |
|
Things go a lot further but there is a problem with the lines that defines It seems this is with |
|
@simone-silvestri , any advice on what is going wrong here? |
|
It looks like there is a bug in the |
|
Thanks @simone-silvestri , I will give that a try! |
Make changes so that it runs
|
@simone-silvestri : I tried it and it seems like a function is not defined. I added this at the beginning and now it seems to be running! |
|
Ah nice. I think we can export that type. |
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #142 +/- ##
=====================================
Coverage 0.00% 0.00%
=====================================
Files 34 34
Lines 1962 1983 +21
=====================================
- Misses 1962 1983 +21 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
|
It's running on a CPU (i.e. slow) and still on the initial time step. I made all these changes on the branch and can revert back to what we had previously as other fixes come along. Maybe I'll have something to share tomorrow. |
|
I started the job yesterday and it hasn't updated the output files in over 24 hours. I think something has gone wrong. Below is the currently display that I have. It hasn't stopped and still running on a CPU. Maybe we need to try it on a GPU or have more output to see what has gone wrong? Any suggestions? |
|
My correction. It is still running on one CPU. It is at 4 days after 7 days of computing. Not a great ratio. What needs to be done so we need to do to run this on a GPU? @simone-silvestri |
|
Wow, that seems quite slow! What if you move it on the GPU? |
Sorry @simone-silvestri for the late reply. I am happy to try it again on a GPU but last time there was an error. I can try it again and let you know what the error is. |
|
@simone-silvestri |
|
I stand corrected, there is more information. To me this actually looks very different even. |
|
Can you make an MWE for this and open an issue? |
I will certainly give it a try and see what part of it is causing the issue. This will likely take me a day or two to get to. |
|
@simone-silvestri , I realize it's been a few months but I am still keen to this this example up and running. I can try this all again this week but if you had time to meet for an hour, I wonder if that would help? |
|
Sure, I ll text on slack. |
Resort to what we have in main, exactly. Surely this must work?
|
I changed the Any ideas how this can happen? |
|
Hello @glwagner, @navidcy and @simone-silvestri , I tried running these tests on my laptop and serve and I obtained the same error as is found on the server above on both. Note that only one test fails and that is This file was last updated last week. Could it be this is a known problem? I see that Navid and Simone were involved in the recent update. |
I want to see if everything passes without this one test. I will return this afterwards.
Since many tests failed I am trying what we had before. Very strange!
|
To follow up, the file that it's trying to download is the following. I looked for the file and see that the id is below, and does match with what appears after fileServer above. Any idea why we get a 404 error when we try and download this and other files? |
Is the link broken? |
Hello @glwagner , I guess so. Last week, when I tried it on my machines i thought I was getting a 404 error but now it seems to have a 500 error. |
|
it looks like there were some vestigial commented out things in |
Co-authored-by: Gregory L. Wagner <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Gregory L. Wagner <[email protected]>
|
Thanks Greg! Sorry, I thought I had returned things to normal, but clearly not the case. I accepted two of your three suggestions, and want to see if all tests pass without this example being added to the docs. If yes, then I'll add the example in to see what changes. |
|
@glwagner , I see two checks have failed. Bummer. When I click on either of them I get a page not found. Any suggestion how I can see the error? |
|
Meh, we might have to adjust buildkite security settings. The error says: does the example run for you? |
It does not run for me on either my laptop or server. I am happy to test the buildkite settings, if that would help. |
|
Interestingly, when the new example is competely removed (thank you again @glwagner), the docs still fail. Sadly, I still can't see the errors. I am trying to build the docs on a server and I will let you know if I come across errors of any kind. |
|
When I tried running the Question: why does it fail on these two checks on github? |
|
It's an out-of-memory error on GPU To display the buildkite publically we probably need to fiddle with buildkite settings |
Let's try a coarser grid to see if this allows us to avoid the memory errors.
|
Ah, good to know! I'm trying a coarser grid, 720x120x40, to see if this avoids the error. |
|
Funny that when I reduce the resolution, and don't do anything else differently, now we have more errors. See below. I'll return the parameters since this clearly did not help. |
Returning to the desired resolution since more errors happened with a coarser grid. Hmm...
Following up on #106, this is a first attempt to create a regional model with ECCO-derived restoring at the boundaries. We decided to try focusing on the ACC in the southern ocean.
It does not run yet, but after it does, it would be good to know if people agree this is a good example to include. If yes, then we need to turn this into an example.