-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 321
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
Change names on ctsm5.2 datasets to include context for "_78_" to "_78pfts" #2073
Comments
Also should 1850-2015 become _simyr1850-2015 as we had before? |
@ekluzek while we're updating the file names, I have additional suggestions. Starting from names like the one that you presented above: I have made three changes to the file name:
|
@slevis-lmwg I like your proposal. The one question I have is if we should keep CMIP6, this does tell you what generation of data was used. @lawrencepj1 do you have an opinion on keeping (or not keeping) the CMIP6 identifier in the surface dataset names? This part only changes every few years with the next CMIP cycle. I think it can be helpful to see what generation the data is from, but I'd like to hear from others if they think it's useful. |
Hi Erik
I think as long as we have the CTSM version in the name we don't need to
have the CMIP version as well. There will be overlap from CMIP6 to CMIP7
for SSP3-7.0 but other scenarios will have different names. The netcdf
metadata would be a better place to include that information.
Thanks
Peter
--
Dr Peter Lawrence
Terrestrial Science Section
National Center for Atmospheric Research
1850 Table Mesa Drive
Boulder Colorado 80305
Work: 1-303-497-1727
Cell: 1-303-956-6932
…On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 12:49 PM Erik Kluzek ***@***.***> wrote:
@slevis-lmwg <https://github.com/slevis-lmwg> I like your proposal. The
one question I have is if we should keep CMIP6, this does tell you what
generation of data was used. @lawrencepj1 <https://github.com/lawrencepj1>
do you have an opinion on keeping (or not keeping) the CMIP6 identifier in
the surface dataset names? This part only changes every few years with the
next CMIP cycle. I think it can be helpful to see what generation the data
is from, but I'd like to hear from others if they think it's useful.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#2073 (comment)>, or
unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AC3OJONZQKR2WUVY6RRO4FDXSKZ2FANCNFSM6AAAAAA2Y6A7DI>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
So back to my example, maybe something like this? |
Thanks Sam,
Yes that looks perfect way to capture the version of the landuse data.
Peter
--
Dr Peter Lawrence
Terrestrial Science Section
National Center for Atmospheric Research
1850 Table Mesa Drive
Boulder Colorado 80305
Work: 1-303-497-1727
Cell: 1-303-956-6932
…On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 4:32 PM Samuel Levis ***@***.***> wrote:
Hi Erik I think as long as we have the CTSM version in the name we don't
need to have the CMIP version as well.
So back to my example, maybe something like this?
landuse.timeseries_0.9x1.25_hist_1850-2015_78pfts_ctsm52_c230601.nc
I added the ctsm52 right before the date stamp, because the two are
somewhat related.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#2073 (comment)>, or
unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AC3OJOIPJMTJPSKHLEQKQODXSLT6RANCNFSM6AAAAAA2Y6A7DI>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
Reminder from meeting with @ekluzek :
|
@adamrher also asks whether fsurdat files generated for transient cases need to include the range of years in their name, as is done now. I think the answer is: No, they do not and to reduce potential confusion, how about we return fsurdat names to including the start year, rather than the range. |
@slevis-lmwg and I went over the naming convention and went with what what I changed the introduction to this to. Here's an example: lnd/clm2/surfdata_esmf/ctsm5.2.0/landuse.timeseries_0.9x1.25_hist_1850-2015_78pfts_c230601.nc |
Names for landuse.timeseries on the ctsm5.2 branch currently should change.
We want to go to this format:
lnd/clm2/surfdata_esmf/ctsm5.2.0/landuse.timeseries_0.9x1.25_hist_1850-2015_78pfts_c230601.nc
lnd/clm2/surfdata_esmf/ctsm5.2.0/fsurdat_0.9x1.25_hist_1850_78pfts_c230601.nc
lnd/clm2/surfdata_esmf/ctsm5.2.0/fsurdat_0.9x1.25_hist_2000_78pfts_c230601.nc
lnd/clm2/surfdata_esmf/ctsm5.2.0/fsurdat_0.9x1.25_hist_2015_78pfts_c230601.nc
lnd/clm2/surfdata_esmf/ctsm5.2.0/landuse.timeseries_0.9x1.25_SSP2-4.5_1850-2100_78pfts_c230601.nc
lnd/clm2/surfdata_esmf/ctsm5.2.0/fsurdat_0.9x1.25_SSP2-4.5_2100_78pfts_c230601.nc
The 78 part should become 78pfts
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: