On Wed, 12 Nov 2008, Vijay S. Mahadevan wrote:

> But really, do you think there is a need for redistribution of all the
> dofs ? I  was thinking that each processor would handle coarsen/refine
> on its own and  only the boundary elements need to update the data as
> to which other processor's elements it is still connected or needs
> data from. You could simply provide an option to handle this case if
> it was a multigrid context. Or am I trying to blow over a lot of
> things without knowing what is happening internally ?

I think so.  I'd be happy to be proven wrong, though.

> If that is a code-breaking change, I will verify with the developers
> of ParMetis if there is a way to obtain the initial distribution of
> the mesh exactly back based on some kind of constraints. I hope this
> is possible.

This isn't the right thing to do - for multigrid we shouldn't be
repartitioning at all, and we can do that by hacking it as an option
on to MeshBase.  Don't bother them about it.
---
Roy

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
_______________________________________________
Libmesh-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libmesh-users

Reply via email to