Added a script to compute memory usage of tracer advection - #105
Merged
Conversation
arporter
requested changes
Aug 4, 2026
arporter
left a comment
arporter
left a comment
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks Aidan. Looks good to me. Just needs a little bit of clarification on "memory usage" but otherwise fine.
Collaborator
Author
|
@arporter Fixed those up, back to you. |
arporter
approved these changes
Aug 5, 2026
arporter
left a comment
arporter
left a comment
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
All good now. I realise we don't have a test for the script but that's a bigger piece of work so I suggest we leave that.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
As required for the paper, it uses the environment variables (as the benchmark does) for setting the problem size, it has some other enviornment variable options as well.
Matches Sergi's results from the sheet exactly, so should be correct.
Ready from a look from @sergisiso or @arporter
Edit:
There could be a reduction in code reuse (as some functions are identical), but for now I wanted to just be explicit (and allows for changes in the future). If you would prefer avoiding dupluication I could do that.