[Einstein Toolkit] #694: Behavior of Slab_Transfer between components owned by the same process

List overview All Threads
Download

newer

older

[Einstein Toolkit] #754: Use...

[Einstein Toolkit] #558: Carpet...

Einstein Toolkit

8 Dec 2011 8 Dec '11

3:13 p.m.

#694: Behavior of Slab_Transfer between components owned by the same process ------------------------+--------------------------------------------------- Reporter: bentivegna | Owner: Type: defect | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Component: Cactus | Version: development version Keywords: Slab | ------------------------+--------------------------------------------------- Slab's documentation states that the Slab_Transfer only works when each process handles a single rectangular component. This affects small runs with periodic boundary conditions (imposed through Slab_Transfer), where two or more components on a single process are common because refinements that try to go past the symmetry boundary are carried over to the opposite side. Currently (attached parameter file), Slab_Transfer silently fails and the boundaries are simply never touched after initial data (except for the usual timelevel cycling).

I'm not sure how easy it is to extend this functionality, but a check that Slab_Transfer is only used as intended should be inserted as soon as possible.

-- Ticket URL: https://trac.einsteintoolkit.org/ticket/694 Einstein Toolkit http://einsteintoolkit.org The Einstein Toolkit

Show replies by date

Einstein Toolkit

8 Dec 8 Dec

3:55 p.m.

#694: Behavior of Slab_Transfer between components owned by the same process -------------------------+-------------------------------------------------- Reporter: bentivegna | Owner: Type: defect | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Component: Cactus | Version: development version Resolution: | Keywords: Slab -------------------------+--------------------------------------------------

Comment (by eschnett):

The best short-term solution I can think of is to initialise all boundary points with nan before calling Slab_Transfer. This would at least catch uninitialised points. There could even be a loop checking for these nans and aborting after calling Slab_Transfer.

-- Ticket URL: https://trac.einsteintoolkit.org/ticket/694#comment:1 Einstein Toolkit http://einsteintoolkit.org The Einstein Toolkit

Einstein Toolkit

3:58 p.m.

Comment (by eschnett):

Other symmetry thorns do have such a test. The code could probably just be copied over.

-- Ticket URL: https://trac.einsteintoolkit.org/ticket/694#comment:2 Einstein Toolkit http://einsteintoolkit.org The Einstein Toolkit

Einstein Toolkit

9 Dec 9 Dec

12:45 p.m.

#694: Behavior of Slab_Transfer between components owned by the same process -------------------------+-------------------------------------------------- Reporter: bentivegna | Owner: Type: defect | Status: review Priority: major | Milestone: Component: Cactus | Version: development version Resolution: | Keywords: Slab -------------------------+-------------------------------------------------- Changes (by eschnett):

* status: new => review

Comment:

The attached patch to CactusNumerical/Periodic allows checking whether Slab applied its boundary conditions correctly.

-- Ticket URL: https://trac.einsteintoolkit.org/ticket/694#comment:3 Einstein Toolkit http://einsteintoolkit.org The Einstein Toolkit

Einstein Toolkit

20 Dec 20 Dec

5:47 p.m.

#694: Behavior of Slab_Transfer between components owned by the same process -------------------------+-------------------------------------------------- Reporter: bentivegna | Owner: Type: defect | Status: review Priority: major | Milestone: Component: Cactus | Version: development version Resolution: | Keywords: Slab -------------------------+--------------------------------------------------

Comment (by bentivegna):

I think that the portion of this patch that sets/checks for poison acts on all of a component's boundaries, including e.g. interprocessor boundaries, which Slab_Transfer is not supposed to fill in. I assume we need to introduce some logic like we have elsewhere, with a boolean "is_symmetry_boundary"-type variable to check whether a point has to be filled by Periodic?

-- Ticket URL: https://trac.einsteintoolkit.org/ticket/694#comment:4 Einstein Toolkit http://einsteintoolkit.org The Einstein Toolkit

Einstein Toolkit

16 Jan 16 Jan

9:53 a.m.

#694: Behavior of Slab_Transfer between components owned by the same process -------------------------+-------------------------------------------------- Reporter: bentivegna | Owner: Type: defect | Status: review Priority: major | Milestone: Component: Cactus | Version: development version Resolution: | Keywords: Slab -------------------------+--------------------------------------------------

Comment (by hinder):

I assume from comment:4 that the patch does not work as intended, and throws an error when it finds poison on the interprocessor boundaries?

-- Ticket URL: https://trac.einsteintoolkit.org/ticket/694#comment:5 Einstein Toolkit http://einsteintoolkit.org The Einstein Toolkit

Einstein Toolkit

17 Jan 17 Jan

3:06 a.m.

#694: Behavior of Slab_Transfer between components owned by the same process -------------------------+-------------------------------------------------- Reporter: bentivegna | Owner: Type: defect | Status: review Priority: major | Milestone: Component: Cactus | Version: development version Resolution: | Keywords: Slab -------------------------+--------------------------------------------------

Comment (by bentivegna):

That's correct, the patched code will poison all boundaries, call Slab_Transfer which only acts on the symmetry boundaries, and finally check for poison, finding it on the interprocessor boundaries if any exist. Please disregard this ticket until we have figured out whether this is the right direction to pursue.

-- Ticket URL: https://trac.einsteintoolkit.org/ticket/694#comment:6 Einstein Toolkit http://einsteintoolkit.org The Einstein Toolkit

Einstein Toolkit

3:17 a.m.

#694: Behavior of Slab_Transfer between components owned by the same process -------------------------+-------------------------------------------------- Reporter: bentivegna | Owner: Type: defect | Status: reopened Priority: major | Milestone: Component: Cactus | Version: development version Resolution: | Keywords: Slab -------------------------+-------------------------------------------------- Changes (by hinder):

* status: review => reopened

-- Ticket URL: https://trac.einsteintoolkit.org/ticket/694#comment:7 Einstein Toolkit http://einsteintoolkit.org The Einstein Toolkit

Einstein Toolkit

9 Feb 9 Feb

10:16 a.m.

#694: Behavior of Slab_Transfer between components owned by the same process -------------------------+-------------------------------------------------- Reporter: bentivegna | Owner: Type: defect | Status: reopened Priority: major | Milestone: Component: Cactus | Version: development version Resolution: | Keywords: Slab -------------------------+--------------------------------------------------

Comment (by bentivegna):

In order to use periodic boundary conditions with AMR, the new LSUThorns/PeriodicCarpet should be used instead. The defect in thorn Periodic remains, but a simple error message (pointing perhaps to PeriodicCarpet) should be enough to warn the user when this thorn is used with AMR.

-- Ticket URL: https://trac.einsteintoolkit.org/ticket/694#comment:8 Einstein Toolkit http://einsteintoolkit.org The Einstein Toolkit

5355

Age (days ago)

5418

Last active (days ago)

trac@lists.einsteintoolkit.org

8 comments

1 participants

tags (0)

participants (1)

Einstein Toolkit