Changes between Initial Version and Version 1 of ticket/0677_mpp_rep

Timestamp:

2010-06-07T09:10:26+02:00 (14 years ago)

Author:

rblod

Comment:

--

ticket/0677_mpp_rep

@@ +1 @@
+[[PageOutline]] Last edited [[Timestamp]]
+
+'''Author''' : Rachid Benshila
+
+'''ticket''' : !#677
+
+'''Branch''' : DEV_r1879_mpp_rep
+
+----
+=== Description ===
+Implementation of both methods to get mpp reproducibility, one from ECMWF (key_mpp_rep1) and the other from DFO (key_mpp_rep2). The target is to choose one, thanks to my reviewer's advices, but athis time (7th of June), I made an intensive use of cpp keys to delimit clearly the both methods.
+
+=== Testing ===
+Testing could consider (where appropriate) other configurations in addition to NVTK].
+
+||NVTK Tested||!'''YES/NO!'''||
+||Other model configurations||!'''YES/NO!'''||
+||Processor configurations tested||[ Enter processor configs tested here ]||
+||If adding new functionality please confirm that the [[BR]]New code doesn't change results when it is switched off [[BR]]and !''works!'' when switched on||!'''YES/NO/NA!'''||
+
+(Answering UNSURE is likely to generate further questions from reviewers.)
+
+'Please add further summary details here'
+
+ * Processor configurations tested
+ * etc----
+
+=== Bit Comparability ===
+||Does this change preserve answers in your tested standard configurations (to the last bit) ?||!'''YES/NO !'''||
+||Does this change bit compare across various processor configurations. (1xM, Nx1 and MxN are recommended)||!'''YES/NO!'''||
+||Is this change expected to preserve answers in all possible model configurations?||!'''YES/NO!'''||
+||Is this change expected to preserve all diagnostics? [[BR]]!,,!''Preserving answers in model runs does not necessarily imply preserved diagnostics. !''||!'''YES/NO!'''||
+
+If you answered !'''NO!''' to any of the above, please provide further details:
+
+ * Which routine(s) are causing the difference?
+ * Why the changes are not protected by a logical switch or new section-version
+ * What is needed to achieve regression with the previous model release (e.g. a regression branch, hand-edits etc). If this is not possible, explain why not.
+ * What do you expect to see occur in the test harness jobs?
+ * Which diagnostics have you altered and why have they changed?Please add details here........
+
+----
+=== System Changes ===
+||Does your change alter namelists?||!'''YES/NO !'''||
+||Does your change require a change in compiler options?||!'''YES/NO !'''||
+
+If any of these apply, please document the changes required here.......
+
+----
+=== Resources ===
+!''Please !''summarize!'' any changes in runtime or memory use caused by this change......!''
+
+----
+=== IPR issues ===
+||Has the code been wholly (100%) produced by NEMO developers staff working exclusively on NEMO?||!'''YES/ NO !'''||
+
+If No:
+
+ * Identify the collaboration agreement details
+ * Ensure the code routine header is in accordance with the agreement, (Copyright/Redistribution etc).Add further details here if required..........