Load saved scenario

[nickhorspool]

Hi All,

One of the main areas of constructive feeback from the workshop was the ability to access a saved scenario.

All users said they wanted to be able to access already run simulation set up to go back in and rerun it - for instance, run first in trial version which is quick (30 minutes) then go back in later and rerun in final. Maybe accessible from the scenario page?

Some users also requested the ability to save a scenario at different steps in the workflow. For example maybe save after step 2, then come back later to finish off then submit.

Would like to discuss this with you. Jeff has already raised this dev task and based on feedback I think it is high priority.

[jj0hns0n]

Andreas' rough estimate was 8 hours. My guess is that will be sufficient for an initial implementation, but we should budget more like 16 hours total to test and debug.

[bartvde]

Nick, Jeff, a question: I assume this should only be available if a user has logged into the application right? Not anonymous right?

[nickhorspool]

At the moment the user can get to Step 2 then if they start doing stuff
there they get prompted for log in. So yes this would be the same, a user
should have to log in to access the saved scenarios.

We can start by a user only having access to load scenarios they saved, but
it would be interesting to know if you could put permissions on a saved
scenario, kind of like the layers.

On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 3:52 PM, Bart van den Eijnden <
[email protected]>wrote:

Nick, Jeff, a question: I assume this should only be available if a user
has logged into the application right? Not anonymous right?

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#56 (comment)

[bartvde]

I've got a few more questions whilst implementing this. Jeff gave me a few new endpoints to use:

http://tsudat.nci.org.au/tsudat/internal_polygon/?project=856
http://tsudat.nci.org.au/tsudat/gauge_point/?project=856
http://tsudat.nci.org.au/tsudat/scenario/?project=856

but:

1. for step1 I can get almost all values from the scenario endpoint. What does happen is that I get zero events in the grid, but the scenario contain an event. So for now I just use this event. Question: is it possible that events disappear or do not show up in the grid anymore? In other words is there a logical explanation for this behavior?
2. for step 2 I am missing the value for mesh resolution. Should I use default_friction_value from the scenario endpoint for mesh friction? Also, I do not see a way to restore the DEM layer, so this means that validation of this step is problematic, as it needs a DEM to be valid. So do we change the validation in such a way that if a project is being loaded a DEM does not have to be present? Something else?
3. do the values for step 3 need to be restored as well? From the scenario endpoint? Any pointers to which data to use?
4. I can get the gauge points pretty easily, but what else needs to be restored? Any pointers to which data to use appreciated.

[nickhorspool]

On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 4:41 PM, Bart van den Eijnden <
[email protected]>wrote:

I've got a few more questions whilst implementing this. Jeff gave me a few
new endpoints to use:

http://tsudat.nci.org.au/tsudat/internal_polygon/?project=856
http://tsudat.nci.org.au/tsudat/gauge_point/?project=856
http://tsudat.nci.org.au/tsudat/scenario/?project=856

but:

1. for step1 I can get almost all values from the scenario endpoint. What
   does happen is that I get zero events in the grid, but the scenario contain
   an event. So for now I just use this event. Question: is it possible that
   events disappear or do not show up in the grid anymore? In other words is
   there a logical explanation for this behavior?

For Jeff I think.

2. for step 2 I am missing the value for mesh resolution. Should I use
   default_friction_value from the scenario endpoint for mesh friction? Also, I
   do not see a way to restore the DEM layer, so this means that validation of
   this step is problematic, as it needs a DEM to be valid. So do we change the
   validation in such a way that if a project is being loaded a DEM does not
   have to be present? Something else?

We want to use exactly the internal polygons and the same values for these.

3. do the values for step 3 need to be restored as well? From the scenario
   endpoint? Any pointers to which data to use?

Yes, all the values the same

4. I can get the gauge points pretty easily, but what else needs to be
   restored? Any pointers to which data to use appreciated.

Well, everything needs to be restored. So, essentially everything that is
passed to the run_tsudat code. So someone could just reload and rerun and it
would be exactly the same with NO changes.

Dont know if my answers helped.....

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#56 (comment)

[bartvde]

Hi Nick, no it's helpful. I've just created my own scenario instead of using someone else's scenario, so that helps me understand the workflow. If I can't restore all of the parameters because they are not available in the end points, I'll come back with some more specific questions.

[jj0hns0n]

1. No, this should not happen. Something amiss somewhere. I can investigate with you
2. There are some outstanding issues with these default values. I will look into this problem. Not sure why you cant restore the DEM layer, we can discuss this.
3. All of those variables should be available in the scenario endpoint, they may just be named differently.
4. The gauge points just need to be restored into the grid, thats all.

[bartvde]

1. is caused by wave_height_delta not being persisted correctly (saving as 0.08, but retrieving as 0), Jeff knows about this one, so if this one is fixed, I don't expected the client-side issue to be there anymore.

[bartvde]

Okay, the client-side work is done, however these are some server-side issues I have run into whilst implementing (executive summary):

1. wave_height_delta is not persisted correctly
2. bounding_polygon_maxarea is not persisted at all (sent by the client, but not retrievable)
3. gauge point heights are sent by the client, but not retrieved back

ad 3 (PUT request):

{"type":"Feature","properties":{"name":"p2","elevation":"3.5","project_id":"863"},"geometry":{"type":"Point","coordinates":[160.07269475,-33.480598516579]}}


Jeff, let me know when these are fixed, and I can finish off this ticket. TIA.

[bartvde]

Thanks for the fixes Jeff, I've added the last remaining bits to the client, and I've removed height from the gauge points in the UI. Closing.