Instructions to run WRF for Hurricane Matthew use case on derecho #62
Conversation
|
@briannen, I merged changes from main to fix the documentation build failures. Could you take a look at these changes and provide a review? I wonder if this content should go at the top of the docs/Users_Guide/running.rst file instead of its own file? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Overall:
- Update this file to align with the template (https://github.com/NCAR/i-wrf/blob/main/docs/Users_Guide/use_case_template.rst?plain=1)
Line by Line:
- 24-25: Talks about Jetstream2, but these are directions for Derecho.
- 64: Change Singularity to Apptainer
- 73: Change singularity to apptainer
- 100: Change singularity to apptainer
- 103: Change singularity to apptainer
… set of instructions
… WRF_DIR to WRF_DATE_DIR and added WRF_TOP_DIR to make it easier to mount the wrf directory separately from references to the dated subdirectory. Include common content to avoid redundancy across instructions for different linux platforms
|
I moved the new content from the PR to the appropriate location following the new format of the use case instructions. I made the suggested changes from this PR and modified the instructions to more closely match the instructions for the other platforms. I also pulled out common content that can be included in multiple sets of instructions to reduce redundancy. Someone should run through these instructions on Derecho to make sure that everything works as expected. Updated instructions can be found here: |
… node when finished
… derecho to be clear which HPC these instructions have been written for
There was a problem hiding this comment.
After resolving the remaining two minor comments/suggestions, this will be ready for approval. Thanks, @georgemccabe!
…rs that portions of the runs may take some time to complete and what to look for to continue instructions
…example to view output using display
|
@jaredalee , I made the changes you suggested and added a section to describe how to view a few images. Take a look at the latest version and let me know if these look good to you or if you have any other suggestions for edits. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good to me! Thanks for making those additions, @georgemccabe.
Pull Request Testing
Describe testing already performed for these changes:
Recommend testing for the reviewer(s) to perform, including the location of input datasets, and any additional instructions:
Do these changes include sufficient documentation updates, ensuring that no errors or warnings exist in the build of the documentation? [Yes or No]
Do these changes include sufficient testing updates? [Yes or No]
Will this PR result in changes to the test suite? [Yes or No]
If yes, describe the new output and/or changes to the existing output:
Please complete this pull request review by [Fill in date].
Pull Request Checklist
Select: Reviewer(s)
Select: Organization level software support Project or Repository level development cycle Project
Select: Milestone as the version that will include these changes