> Thanks for great tipp. That was rather easy.
> But should I use the locally_relevant_index_set as the second argument or
> locally_relevant_dofs.subtract_set(locally_owned_dofs)?
> Both versions work for me so far.
Great! That doesn't matter (we actually subtract that set to get the
ghost values inside that function).
> Oh. Okay. Thank you for the information. Sorry for the duplicate thread. I
> will read those threads carefully next.
No problem. That is not a thing that is easy to find if you don't know
what you are looking for.
> So I guess it is not possible right now to only prepare and excecute
> refinement without considering any coarsening flags?
No, I don't think so (without modifying the source code). The flags
are set in prepare_coarsening_and_refinement().
So one hack you could do is the following
class MyTriangulation : public parallel::distributed::Triangulation
{
public:
bool prepare_coarsening_and_refinement() {
// 1. call dealii::Triangulation<dim>::prepare_coarsening_and_refinement();
// 2. remove all coarsening flags
// 3. if any flags changed, return true, else return false
}
};
and use that. Take a look at the implementation in distributed/tria.cc
for inspiration. Note that this will break if you have periodic
boundary conditions.
Let us know if this lets you run with patch_level_1
--
Timo Heister
http://www.math.clemson.edu/~heister/
--
The deal.II project is located at http://www.dealii.org/
For mailing list/forum options, see
https://groups.google.com/d/forum/dealii?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"deal.II User Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
