Kai Bao
Kai Bao
Not remembering what happened with the regression test before the refactoring, will create a PR for testing purpose.
The following is some notes for information. The thing is a little worrying is that, when we check the group target for a well, the group target might not be...
> Yes, but don't you think it's better in this case to treat it properly as a zero rate well than trying to solve it with an individual zero rate...
I checked the regression test with `PYACTION_WCONPROD`. It looks like the different results are also from different time-stepping. If we regulate the time step with `--solver-max-time-step-in-days=30`, the results will be...
For the test failure, `ACTIONX_GCONPROD`, the message is not very clear. ``` Loading rft file /var/lib/jenkins/workspace/opm-simulators-PR-builder/deps/opm-tests/actionx/opm-simulation-reference/flow/ACTIONX_GCONPROD.RFT .... done Loading rft file /var/lib/jenkins/workspace/opm-simulators-PR-builder/mpi/build-opm-simulators/tests/results/flow+actionx_gconprod/ACTIONX_GCONPROD.RFT .... done Well: OP01 date: 2017/12/31 Comparing: TIME...
With some discussion and help from @bska , the regression failure for `ACTIONX_GCONPROD` is related to RUNSUM keyword. Since the simulation results look generally fine and for this failure, we...
@steink , can you update the PR to fix the merging conflicts, then we can check how to adjust and update the reference so that we can get the PR...
jenkins build this please
Thanks for checking. Then referring to the previous comment, https://github.com/OPM/opm-simulators/pull/5232#issuecomment-2074934882 `PYACTION_WCONPROD` will need to have a little bit book on how to update the reference.
jenkins build this please