> On Sun, Dec 02, 2007 at 06:17:35PM +0100, Johan Hoffman wrote: >> > >> > >> > Johan Hoffman wrote: >> >>> Johan Hoffman wrote: >> >>>> Hi all, >> >>>> >> >>>> Connected to this discussion is also the msc thesis work on dolfin >> >>>> parallization of Nicklas Jansson at KTH. He has now started working >> on >> >>>> this based on the updated TODO list of dolfin. He has tried to send >> an >> >>>> email to this list ([email protected]) but it appears that it >> is >> >>>> stuck >> >>>> in a filter awaiting moderator approval. >> >>> If he joins the list, he'll be able to make posts. >> >> >> >> Ok. >> >> >> >>> Maybe someone (a moderator) could >> >>>> help out so that we can get past this, to better coordinate >> >>>> parallelization efforts? >> >>>> >> >>> One point on the TODO list: we discussed some time ago the mesh >> >>> partitioning, and decided against ParMETIS or METIS because they do >> not >> >>> use a GPL (compatible) license. Magnus has implemented a nice >> >>> partitioning interface which uses SOCTCH which does have a GPL >> >>> compatible license. >> >> >> >> Ok. Does the switch to LGPL licence for dolfin make any difference? >> Or >> >> is >> >> it still a conflict? >> >> >> > >> > There is still a conflict. The METIS license basically says that it >> can >> > be used for non-profit purposes only, and permission is required to >> > re-distribute it. >> >> Ok, then there is a problem. >> >> >> About Scotch; the argument was that it lacked parallel partitioning, >> and >> >> a >> >> few other nice features of parMetis. But it seems that Scotch v5.0 is >> >> moving towards a parallel implementation as well? >> >> >> > >> > It does have it now. That said, I can't see us using or needing >> parallel >> > partitioning in the short- to medium-term future. >> >> Ok. Maybe we'll manage with Scotch for now then. >> >> As for parallel assembly, we will need this in the coming months, so we >> will push the fully parallel approach within Nicklas' msc project, >> including parallel redistribution for adaptively refined meshes (which >> parMetis seems to support nicely). >> >> /Johan > > Sounds very good, but if major changes to the Mesh classes are > necessary (which seems likely), I suspect I will be somewhat sensitive > to having all those changes pushed at once. So it would be good to > discuss plans for the design as early as possible so we can all feel > comfortable with the changes. > > -- > Anders
I agree. That's why the TODO list was added in the dolfin rep, and an accompanying dolfin-dev post was sent (...which got stuck in the filter). With a fresh dolfin-dev membership, Nicklas can resend his post where the strategy is presented in more detail, which then anyone can comment on. I would expect the plan to be rather uncontroversial, and it will fit nicely with the work of Magnus. /Johan _____________________________________________ > DOLFIN-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.fenics.org/mailman/listinfo/dolfin-dev > _______________________________________________ DOLFIN-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.fenics.org/mailman/listinfo/dolfin-dev
