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

Read grid file #17

Closed
TomNicholas opened this issue Dec 8, 2018 · 5 comments
Closed

Read grid file #17

TomNicholas opened this issue Dec 8, 2018 · 5 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request requires BOUT changes May require changes to BOUT++ upstream to implement

Comments

@TomNicholas
Copy link
Collaborator

The BOUT grid file is just another netCDF file, but we should read it and merge it into the dataset.

Ideally BOUT would be changed upstream so that it writes the grid data into the dump files, so that open_boutdataset() doesn't need another filepath argument.

@TomNicholas TomNicholas added enhancement New feature or request requires BOUT changes May require changes to BOUT++ upstream to implement labels Dec 8, 2018
@d7919
Copy link
Member

d7919 commented Dec 8, 2018

Not all simulations use a grid file so we'd have to be careful to make sure this was an optional feature (but could still be automatic if available). The other thing we'd have to be careful of is that often much of what is in the grid file ends up being written into the dump files but often with a different normalisation. As such we'd have to be careful that these duplicates are clearly distinct.

I think this would rule out enforcing BOUT always writing the grid data into the dump files (at least in a simple way, we would have to disambiguate the raw grid data variable names). Secondly we only load information from the grid file on demand and don't currently explore/know all the variables that are available -- should we only write what we load or should we add functionality to read everything?

@rdoyle45
Copy link
Collaborator

Can this be closed due to the changes made in #33 ? @TomNicholas

@TomNicholas
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I think we can close it once the changes in #58 have been merged :)

@rdoyle45
Copy link
Collaborator

rdoyle45 commented Dec 3, 2019

Close?

@johnomotani
Copy link
Collaborator

Resolved by #58.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request requires BOUT changes May require changes to BOUT++ upstream to implement
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants