Met reads for passive tracer sims, do we pull in more met fields than needed?

[aschuh]

Your name

Andrew Schuh

Your affiliation

Colorado State University

Please provide a clear and concise description of your question or discussion topic.

I'm not sure if the model pulls ALL met fields in from the driving met files during the simulation, I'm guessing YES. I'm curious, if one is only running passive tracers, you need U, V, CMFMC, etc, but I'm guessing there are a lot of fields,particularly 3D, that are not needed? Is anyone aware of how this partitions, which fields wouldn't be needed? and whether there would be a way to put a switch in to control this? The met reads are the majority of the time spent running the model. Reading in 50% of the fields shoudl essentially half the run time?

Any thoughts on this?

andrew

[msulprizio]

Yes, this has been on the GCST's wish list to evaluate the met fields needed for each simulation type and only read/allocate the necessary fields. We just haven't gotten to it. See related issue:

• [FEATURE REQUEST] Read and allocate state_met fields based on simulation and components on #499