That sounds like a good savings - how many cores?

ParallelMesh should be capable of writing pieces to many files, or streaming 
into one file. In the latter case the mesh should be completely compatible with 
SerialMesh. 

-Ben

On Apr 4, 2013, at 12:23 AM, "Manav Bhatia" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Roy, 
> 
>   At this point, I do not have a need for off-processor element data. So, the 
> current status of ParallelMesh could be a good thing. 
> 
>   I did give it a go for my application, and so far it seems to be working 
> well. The memory footprint of each process has also come down significantly 
> (from ~4GB to ~0.8GB), which is great! 
> 
>   I noticed that the .xdr restart solutions are now written one per mesh 
> block. This seems to suggest that this can be read into a ParallelMesh data 
> structure for a restart, and not a SerialMesh.  Is this correct?
> 
> Thanks, 
> Manav
> 
> On Apr 3, 2013, at 2:25 AM, Roy Stogner <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, 3 Apr 2013, Manav Bhatia wrote:
>> 
>>> As a related question, if my code is running on a multicore machine,
>>> then can I use --n-threads to parallelize both the matrix assembly
>>> and the Petsc linear solvers? Or do I have to use mpi for Petsc?
>> 
>> PETSc isn't multithreaded, but I'm told it can be built to use
>> third-party preconditioners which are multithreaded, so that you get
>> decent scaling out of your solve.  I haven't done this myself.
>> 
>>> I am running problems with over a million elements, and using mpi on
>>> my multicore machine makes each process consume over 1GB of RAM.
>> 
>> ParallelMesh was invented to get me out of a similar jam.
>> 
>>> On Apr 3, 2013, at 1:24 AM, Manav Bhatia <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I am curious if the parallel mesh is now suitable for general use.
>> 
>> Unfortunately ParallelMesh may never be suitable for "general" use,
>> because the most general SerialMesh-using codes sometimes assume at
>> the application level that every process can see every element.  If
>> your problem includes contact, integro-differential terms, or any such
>> coupling beyond the layer of ghost elements that ParallelMesh exposes,
>> then you have to do some very careful manual communications to make
>> that work on a distributed mesh.
>> 
>> ParallelMesh is also still much less tested than SerialMesh - it works
>> with all the examples and all the compatible application codes I've
>> tried, but I wouldn't be surprised if there are tricky AMR or other
>> corner cases where it breaks in nasty ways.
>> 
>> More testing would certainly be appreciated.
>> ---
>> Roy
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Minimize network downtime and maximize team effectiveness.
> Reduce network management and security costs.Learn how to hire 
> the most talented Cisco Certified professionals. Visit the 
> Employer Resources Portal
> http://www.cisco.com/web/learning/employer_resources/index.html
> _______________________________________________
> Libmesh-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libmesh-users

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minimize network downtime and maximize team effectiveness.
Reduce network management and security costs.Learn how to hire 
the most talented Cisco Certified professionals. Visit the 
Employer Resources Portal
http://www.cisco.com/web/learning/employer_resources/index.html
_______________________________________________
Libmesh-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libmesh-users

Reply via email to