[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[TIGGE #LGY-600646]: Re: Missing fields from CMA

This archive contains answers to questions sent to Unidata support through mid-2025. Note that the archive is no longer being updated. We provide the archive for reference; many of the answers presented here remain technically correct, even if somewhat outdated. For the most up-to-date information on the use of NSF Unidata software and data services, please consult the Software Documentation first.

  • Subject: [TIGGE #LGY-600646]: Re: Missing fields from CMA
  • Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 14:48:10 -0600
Manuel,

You wrote:

>I do not understand this point. CMA is not requesting BABJ data (in the
>same manner ECMWF is not requesting ECMWF/EGRR/RJTD data nor NCAR is
>requesting KWBC data). Could you, please, clarify this point ?

This comment was based on a period when ECMWF had FTP'd some data from CMA and
was inserting it at tigge-ldm.ecmwf.int with the babj headers. We understand 
that this
is not happening currently.

The point is correct that CMA does not request data with babj headers,
so when we looked at data volumes originating at ECMWF, they were much
larger than what CMA was receiving. This was correct behavior, but lead
to some periods of time when little to no data originating from 
tigge-ldm.ecmwf.int
was arriving at CMA when looking at volume plots. The original assumption was 
that
something must be wrong with the LDM when volume plots for CMA showed little 
egrr/ecmf
data arriving from ECMWF or NCAR, however after verifying that the only data 
available
from ECMWF and NCAR had babj headers, we would see this was appropriate.

The pacing of babj data into the queue at ECMWF to maintain proper data rates
meant that there were no products with ecmf or egrr headers for which CMA's
request lines were matching.

Steve Chiswell
Unidata User Support


Ticket Details
===================
Ticket ID: LGY-600646
Department: Support IDD TIGGE
Priority: Normal
Status: Closed