| 76 | | ''== Meeting Minutes == |
| 77 | | |
| 78 | | ''Coming after the meeting'' |
| | 76 | == Meeting Minutes == |
| | 77 | |
| | 78 | === Discussion on 2017 annual report |
| | 79 | |
| | 80 | The draft of 2017 annual report is available as input to the discussion [attachment:wiki:DevelopersCommittee/End2017:2017_AnnualReport.docx here] |
| | 81 | Brief overview of the main streams of the year: |
| | 82 | * Goal 1 (short term): Bring the 3_6 release to its final stable state in time for CMIP6 |
| | 83 | * Goal 2 (mid term): Implement new features as prerequisites for next version 4.0, including important developments, major simplifications and |
| | 84 | robustness changes |
| | 85 | * Goal 3 (long term): Contribute to prepare, discuss and update of NEMO development Strategy document (3 days meeting in April in Barcelona) |
| | 86 | * A major new feature: the new sea-ice framework, in place of LIM2 and LIM3 |
| | 87 | * Report to be completed with discussions during this meeting on Working groups |
| | 88 | * Additional work in 2017 to prepare and organise Enlarged DevCom meeting in Barcelona in April |
| | 89 | |
| | 90 | Round table for each of the Consortium and external experts : |
| | 91 | * Met-Office (H. Hewitt): Very happy with the work done in 2017 and the report. Confirms that CMIP6 diagnostics did take more time than expected |
| | 92 | * CMCC (P.G. Folgi): Also happy with work done. Points important and good work on simplification, AGRIF and HPC |
| | 93 | * Mercator (Y. Drillet): Also happy although Mercator is not concerned by CMIP6 |
| | 94 | * CNRS (R. Benshila): Happy also, and especially to see that AGRIF is alive in NEMO and that this working group has been working and discussing, meaning that there is now more than J. Chanut on this part. Happy also to see that active work is on going on numerics |
| | 95 | * NOC and CMCC Consortium experts not attending |
| | 96 | Comments and suggestions of external experts : |
| | 97 | * D. Marshall, L. Brodeau and J.M. Molines : not really much to add to previous comments. |
| | 98 | |
| | 99 | The Developer's Committee congratulates the NEMO System Team for the amount and quality of the work done in 2017. |
| | 100 | |
| | 101 | === Report of activities and 2018 perspectives for Working Groups |
| | 102 | |
| | 103 | J. Le Sommer reminds that the work expected from Working groups is somewhere in between the long term (NEMO development strategy document) and the clearly defined actions of the workplan. Working group are expected to address some questions on a yearly basis. Report and discussion on Working group should aim at clearly define those questions: those answered in 2017 and scheduled for 2018. |
| | 104 | |
| | 105 | ==== AGRIF |
| | 106 | ''Add J. Chanut slides, or their content'' |
| | 107 | Discussion: |
| | 108 | * AGRIF working with TOP is a functionality that has been dropped for now. This should be reconsidered. |
| | 109 | * Usefulness of test cases (vortex used widely for AGRIF). Should become systematic |
| | 110 | * Back port (better) status of AGRIF in the trunk now to 3_6_STABLE? Would need a large amount of work on LIM3 and vvl if is was to be done. No member of DevCom advocates for this back port. |
| | 111 | * Nesting tools allow setting up a NEMO configuration with AGRIF zoom. It’s update in order to work with the future release is scheduled, which is indeed an important and priority task, since for now people willing to use AGRIF are stopped by configuration problems. It is indeed critical to have a tool for this. Why doing it with Nesting tools, rather than for example with SIREN? |
| | 112 | Answer: |
| | 113 | * As a start because Canada is using it now, Nesting tools was the simplest way to go |
| | 114 | * For the future (where a number of AGRIF zooms can be expected) using directly the AGRIF library is seen by WG as the best way to go, since it is more flexible. |
| | 115 | |
| | 116 | * AGRIF WG is more active which is good news, but one of its active members TimGraham, just left. Will his work time on AGRIF be replaced (question to Mt-Office and System team)? No answer at this point. Must be on the agenda of next June’s meeting |
| | 117 | |
| | 118 | '''Recommendations of Developer’s Committee to WG:''' |
| | 119 | |
| | 120 | |
| | 121 | |
| | 122 | ==== Air sea interactions |
| | 123 | ''Add Emanuela’s slides |
| | 124 | Emanuela + Sébastien presentation |
| | 125 | |
| | 126 | Discussion: |
| | 127 | * Raises the questions on where the coming developments are done at first and why (in the “trunk”, i.e. the coming release, or in 3_6_STABLE)? Discussions to be continued here, within WG and System Team |
| | 128 | * D. Marshall: the merging of vertical mixing (TKE GLS and OSMOSIS)is not mature for now, at least concerning OSMOSIS. Should maybe be envisaged later on |
| | 129 | |
| | 130 | '''Recommendations of Developer’s Committee to WG: |
| | 131 | 1. Add list of members of this new WG in minutes of this meeting |
| | 132 | 2. Clarify for next meeting (mid 2018) schedule of ALBATROS project contributions, their status (starting release, status of validation, of documentation) in the next 2 years. |
| | 133 | 3. Build a list of extra work (not in ALBATROS) and possible PIs for it, like sea-ice tiling with this new air-sea interface |
| | 134 | 4. Rationalise what should be strategy of connection of this new air sea interface to vertical physics in ocean |
| | 135 | |
| | 136 | |
| | 137 | ==== Configuration Manager |
| | 138 | ''Add Stefania’s presentation |
| | 139 | Discussion |
| | 140 | *Question on status of J. Harle work (had announced some pynemo config tools): on hold, no new for now |
| | 141 | * For 2018, emphasis on Nesting tools for AGRIF is a priority for the Consortium |
| | 142 | * There is quite an amount of work going on with 4 different tools, but no general frame |
| | 143 | * Future implementations need discussions an decisions |
| | 144 | * There will be a tutorial on SIREN at Mercator in 2018 |
| | 145 | |
| | 146 | ''' Recommendations of Developer’s Committee to Configuration Manager WG: |
| | 147 | |
| | 148 | Since the Developer’s Committee now has a subgroup to discuss things in advance and prepare agenda of meetings, the Devcom asks |
| | 149 | 1. For the next 6 months, this WG is on hold, and decision to be made during next DevCom meeting (mid 2018) |
| | 150 | 2. For each of the four existing tools, complete a brief report, for April 2018, using the template sent by subgroup in March. List of reports : SIREN (Julien Paul), Nesting tools (J. Chanut), BDY tools (Stefania Ciliberti), pynemo (J. Harle). Same request to Test case WG on the tools to set up a test case configuration (S. Flavoni) |
| | 151 | 3. Since the tools for setting up an AGRIF configuration are the priority of Consortium for now, move the SIREN Actions of 2018 Work plan from “Shared actions”, to “Specific actions for Mercator” |
| | 152 | |
| | 153 | |
| | 154 | |
| | 155 | * Informations from subgroup on other Working groups acivities and their 2018 agenda |
| | 156 | ==== HPC WG |
| | 157 | |
| | 158 | This Working Group is closely following all the development and exploratory work going on simultaneously in this field. Important to note than the WG not only included the Consortium experts but also a number of other major partners including BSC, and computer vendors |
| | 159 | 2017 |
| | 160 | * Intra-node performance |
| | 161 | * Real vs peak performance |
| | 162 | * Investigation of a benchmark configuration on different HPC systems |
| | 163 | * Vectorization improvement |
| | 164 | * Hybrid parallelization |
| | 165 | * OpenMP shared memory approach |
| | 166 | * Fine grained (loop-level) approach à execution time gain ~5-6% |
| | 167 | * Coarse grained approach (tested on vertical physics) à intra- node parallel efficiency gain ~9% |
| | 168 | * I/O performance improvement |
| | 169 | 2018 |
| | 170 | * Intra-node performance cont’ |
| | 171 | * Scalability improvement |
| | 172 | * Reducing the communication overhead |
| | 173 | * Performance portability on heterogeneous architectures |
| | 174 | * Reduced precision |
| | 175 | |
| | 176 | '''Recommendations of Developer’s Committee to HPC WG: |
| | 177 | |
| | 178 | ==== Kernel (new) WG |
| | 179 | Proposed by Mike Bell, see attached document, and |
| | 180 | List of experts contacted for now by Mike Bell: |
| | 181 | Jérôme Chanut |
| | 182 | Andrew Coward |
| | 183 | Alex Megann |
| | 184 | Dave Storkey |
| | 185 | Florian Lemarié |
| | 186 | Laurent Debreu |
| | 187 | David Marshall |
| | 188 | Julien Le Sommer |
| | 189 | Adrian New |
| | 190 | Gurvan Madec |
| | 191 | Rachid Benshila |
| | 192 | Anne-Marie Tréguier |
| | 193 | |
| | 194 | '''Recommendations of Developer’s Committee to kernel WG:''' |
| | 195 | |
| | 196 | * Creation of this new WG is approved |
| | 197 | * Is Mike Bell going to lead both HPC and Kernel WG? |
| | 198 | |
| | 199 | ==== Data assimilation and interface, modelling uncertainties WG |
| | 200 | |
| | 201 | * WG is not really alive since 2016 (leave of its leader) , but subject is indeed important |
| | 202 | * Next relevant meeting will be a workshop which Mercator-Ocean-International (MOI) is organising in late May or early June and that the scope of the workshop is defined in the MOI workplan for this year as to: |
| | 203 | |
| | 204 | ''Organize a workshop with NEMOVAR and NEMO/Assim communities on data assimilation issues, setting the scene for creating a European infrastructure in marine data assimilation. This will include an assessment of the strengths, weaknesses as well as long term evolution plans and future commonalities (e.g. ensemble approaches) of the NEMOVar, NEMO/Assim and SAM tools.'' |
| | 205 | |
| | 206 | • Some feedbacks on the outcomes of this meeting are expected for next DevCom meeting mid 2018 |
| | 207 | |
| | 208 | ==== Top discussion group |
| | 209 | 2017 |
| | 210 | * Increase TOP robustness with bug-fixes to code wrt BCs, damping, tracers integration; |
| | 211 | * Code improvement for offline simulations; |
| | 212 | 2018 |
| | 213 | * Add TOP chapter to NEMO user manual and create a quick user guide on the NEMO forge documentation |
| | 214 | * Develop a general scheme to simulate tracers vertical sinking; |
| | 215 | * Development of the generalized tracer sinking scheme is the first issue identified in the NDS (10.2.1) whereas documentation (reference manual and wiki pages) has become a mandatory task before the next release (July 2018) |
| | 216 | ''' Recommendations of Developer’s Committee to TOP WG:''' |
| | 217 | |
| | 218 | ==== Robustness and test cases |
| | 219 | |
| | 220 | 2017 |
| | 221 | * Methodology and tools to set up a test case have been designed (github and python notebook) |
| | 222 | * A number of institutions of the consortium did implement at least one test case: |
| | 223 | * Overflow (CNRS – Simona) |
| | 224 | * Lock exchange (CNRS- Simona) |
| | 225 | * Wetting and drying (NOC – Andrew) |
| | 226 | * ISOMIP (Met-Office – Pierre) |
| | 227 | * Baroclinic vortex (Mercator - Jérôme) |
| | 228 | * SAS biperiodic box (CNRS - Clément R.) |
| | 229 | 2018: |
| | 230 | * Each builder of an existing test case to update it on 2018 trunk, so as compliant with github and python notebooks |
| | 231 | * A common github to be set up |
| | 232 | * Choose the test cases the NEMO System team wants to use as validation tests (-> action of WG) and implement them in the validation script (SETTE) |
| | 233 | * The discussion on criteria for acceptance of new test cases does not appear as a priority task for WG in 2018: already a lot to be done. |
| | 234 | |
| | 235 | '''Recommendations of Developer’s Committee to Test cases WG: |
| | 236 | * For next meeting mid 2018, WG to present the list of available and up to date test cases with a proposed list (to be discussed) on those entering the NEMO test bed. |
| | 237 | |
| | 238 | |
| | 239 | |
| | 240 | |
| | 241 | ==== Sea-ice |
| | 242 | '' Add Martin’s slides |
| | 243 | |
| | 244 | |
| | 245 | === NDS document final approval |
| | 246 | The document (attached to this page) has its final content and no red light from Sterring Committee. It is now important to check the final form for a public release. DevCom members are requested to make a final check on the document form if possible and sent suggestions to Claire Lévy before January 23rd, in order to make the public release as soon as possible now. |
| | 247 | |
| | 248 | === Information on important calls or projects 10 mn |
| | 249 | |
| | 250 | === Discussion on 2018 proposed Workplan 20 mn |
| | 251 | |
| | 252 | |
| | 253 | |
| | 254 | === Information on XIOS and OASIS: possible evolutions, convergences, sustainable resources for development and support 10 mn |
| | 255 | |
| | 256 | === Presentation on open development practices elsewhere : Alistair Adcroft 20 mn |
| | 257 | |
| | 258 | === Conclusions 10 mn |
| | 259 | |
| | 260 | ''These conclusions will include |
| | 261 | * Advice of the Committee on 2017 work and 2018 proposed work plan |
| | 262 | * Possibly message(s) to Steering Committee'' |
