NOTE: The leadusers mailing list is no longer active. The list archives are made available for historical reasons.
Hi Everette,When were these workflows submitted yesterday or today? If its today, 10 workflows were submitted, 7 finished fine, 1 wrf went crazy, 2 are running fine now they should finish up some time soon.
But as I was saying the workflow successful message we are seeing might be misleading. The workflow engine sends a success message if WRF tells it is done, we are not checking if it has finished with good output or bad output. But we need to get those bad outputs experiment information from users and pass those data files to the met. group to refine the configurations. Not sure what he notification problem could be, will look forward to see their bug reports.
Thanks, Suresh Everette Joseph wrote:
LEAD - Master Mailing ListWe submitted runs between 15z and 21z per discussion on Monday. Failure rate seemed high and there were some weird experiences with output and notification--- your email explained the latter -- I think. Our testers should be sending reports to "contact us".EJ Suresh Marru wrote:LEAD - Master Mailing List Hi All, Just want to update on how test runs has been so far this week.The workflows are running good for most of the configurations, we certainly came down quite a bit from 100% success rate but now sure exactly how much, hopefully not below 90%. With good amount of testing from all of you we have a found a problem which prevented you from launching a workflow this morning. Restarts of couple of services helped and everything is fine now but we still did not resolve the problem and will continue to look why the unscheduled and unwanted down time happened.If you have noticed yesterday between morning and 3pm (EST) workflows failed due to some change in a software. We reverted that change and all failed workflows were resurrected late in the evening and finished successfully but not sure if they did a forecast or a post cast. The consequence of this will be duplicates of data in your workspace for the experiments created yesterday.We have seen some WRF runs going unstable in past 2 days, not sure if they gave workflow success or failed status. I did not completely understand the reasons Dan Weber and Brian Jewett have analyzed but you guys might, which is "Looking at the plots Brian generated from the earlier run, convection starts on the southern boundary, which usually means doom for a forecast, especially if it is on an inflow condition (which is the case for the run). No convection was visible in the the ADAS analysis during the forecast area. It seems that the main problem is the placement of the lateral boundary in a region that is mountainous and where convection developed. This is the one of the problems with limited domain forecasts, such as the 5km 201x201x51 grid" -- We still need to parse this to english and then make the changes to data search or namelists.All of this aside, please continue to use our resource reservations at NCSA from 1pm to 6pm (EST) and test and report problems as usual.Happy Testing, Suresh _______________________________________________ LEAD-All mailing list LEAD-All@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.caps.ou.edu/mailman/listinfo/lead-all
============================================================================== To unsubscribe leadusers, visit: http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/mailing-list-delete-form.html ==============================================================================
leadusers archives: