[Users] Spurious test failures due to now bboxset code in Carpet

[Erik Schnetter]

On Jan 20, 2015, at 14:23 , Ian Hinder <ian.hinder at aei.mpg.de> wrote:
> 
> On 20 Jan 2015, at 20:14, Erik Schnetter <schnetter at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Jan 20, 2015, at 14:06 , Roland Haas <roland.haas at physics.gatech.edu> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hello all,
>>> 
>>>> We recently put some work into making the ASCII output from the tests
>>>> the same independent of the number of processes that they are run on.
>>>> This used the fact that the output ordering of components from Carpet
>>>> was the same under certain conditions.  This was using the old
>>>> bboxset class.  Do you know if the new bboxset class has the same
>>>> property?
>>> If we regenerate for the new code but have some machines where it does
>>> not run, this will imply that the tests will fail on those machines, yes.
>> 
>> I updated the old bboxset class to explicitly sort the bboxes. Both are now using the same ordering.
> 
> Do you know why only one test showed a difference?

I assume this is by chance. More complex grid structures are likely to change, and this was an AMR (with actual A) test.

-erik

--
Erik Schnetter <schnetter at gmail.com>
http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/personal/eschnetter/

My email is as private as my paper mail. I therefore support encrypting
and signing email messages. Get my PGP key from https://sks-keyservers.net.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 203 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
Url : http://lists.einsteintoolkit.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20150120/c7291ef6/attachment.bin