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

[FEATURE REQUEST] Add complete set of integration tests #714

Open
8 of 10 tasks
yantosca opened this issue Apr 29, 2021 · 8 comments · Fixed by #1565
Open
8 of 10 tasks

[FEATURE REQUEST] Add complete set of integration tests #714

yantosca opened this issue Apr 29, 2021 · 8 comments · Fixed by #1565
Assignees
Labels
category: Feature Request New feature or request no-diff-to-benchmark This update will not change the results of fullchem benchmark simulations topic: Benchmarking and Testing Related to CI, integration tests, or scientific benchmarking

Comments

@yantosca
Copy link
Contributor

yantosca commented Apr 29, 2021

The GEOS-Chem integration tests have in general been working well and have allowed us to catch and fix several issues in both GCClassic and GCHP before releasing a new version.

However, some recent "edge cases" (cf geoschem/HEMCO#82, geoschem/HEMCO#84) were not caught by the integration tests and thus required subsequent bug fix commits.

The following additional integration tests would be very useful:

  • Nested grid integration tests (at least one)
  • Running across the end of a year (e.g. start at 00z Dec 31 and run to 01z Jan 1st)
  • GCHP stretched grid integration tests
  • GCC parallelization tests (single-core vs multi-core)
  • Difference tests for zero-diff updates (should be optional)
  • Integration test with BPCH_DIAG on (or better yet remove BPCH_DIAG!)
  • Integration test for GCHP RRTMG
  • Other structural updates
  • Add option to have integration tests "skip bootstrapping" of missing restart file variables. This can be useful to do right before a release to see if we need to post new restart files from 1-yr benchmarks, especially when new species have been added.

@lizziel, @msulprizio, @yidant: feel free to add to this list

@yantosca yantosca added the category: Feature Request New feature or request label Apr 29, 2021
@LiamBindle
Copy link
Contributor

I've ran into an issue a couple times where ExtData.rc was missing an update in HEMCO_Config.rc. If we're putting together a wishlist, I would add something to check that ExtData.rc and HEMCO_Config.rc are in agreement.

Note: I haven't ran into this with official releases, but often I work with developement code and I've ran into it there.

@lizziel
Copy link
Contributor

lizziel commented May 6, 2021

Looks good. I think once we have zero diffs across single and multi runs we could have a regular test for that too. We aren't there yet though.

@LiamBindle, regarding your request, we've put that on hold pending the update of ExtData.rc and HEMCO_Config.rc to yaml. However, if we find an eager student to put together a script to check the config files as they are now then we should definitely encourage that.

@msulprizio msulprizio changed the title [FEATURE REQUEST] Add new integration tests designed to catch "edge cases" [FEATURE REQUEST] Add complete set of integration tests Jun 17, 2021
@lizziel
Copy link
Contributor

lizziel commented Jun 17, 2021

I just expanded the list to include GCHP RRTMG.

@yantosca
Copy link
Contributor Author

yantosca commented Aug 5, 2021

I've re-enabled the nested-grid integration tests. This was made possible by creating new sample boundary condition files as described in #811.

@yantosca
Copy link
Contributor Author

Also note: integration tests now use default run directory names in PR #1565

@yantosca
Copy link
Contributor Author

I've added a GCHP RRTMG integration test as part of #1565.

@yantosca yantosca added the no-diff-to-benchmark This update will not change the results of fullchem benchmark simulations label Dec 21, 2022
@yantosca yantosca self-assigned this Dec 21, 2022
@yantosca
Copy link
Contributor Author

@lizziel @msulprizio: Do we still need "DIfference tests for zero-diff updates?" We now have that implmented via the 1-hr cloud benchmarks.

@lizziel
Copy link
Contributor

lizziel commented Aug 29, 2023

I added a dry run integration test to the list.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
category: Feature Request New feature or request no-diff-to-benchmark This update will not change the results of fullchem benchmark simulations topic: Benchmarking and Testing Related to CI, integration tests, or scientific benchmarking
Projects
None yet
3 participants