Hi, Thanks for the bug report. I have a fix for this that's going through testing right now. It's at https://gitlab.kitware.com/vtk/vtk/merge_requests/1300 if you want to take a look and test it out as well. I only tested it with your input so it could certainly use a bit more testing with other data sets. If you do that, please let us know how it works.
Best, Andy On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 11:03 AM, Andrew Parker via vtkusers < [email protected]> wrote: > Dear All, > > I have recently been having problems reading pvtu files in paraview when > those files contain arbitrary polyhedrons: this is from the output of a > large scale code that runs in parallel via mpi. To show the problem, I > have written a very small sample code, attached, that runs in serial but > reproduces the salient issues experienced by my larger code when run in > parallel. It is clear, via the toggling a boolean, that the problem > happens when vtk_polyhedrons types are used. There is a short description > at the top of the bug.cxx file, followed by instructions. I use stock > versions of paraview here, although self compiled ones show no difference. > > In short compile the code, run it, and open the pvtu file in paraview. > You should see 4 cells. > Switch the “bug” bool to true, recompile, re-run it, and reopen the pvtu > file. The screen will be blank. > > The only difference is that cells are added to the unstructured grid > explicitly as vtk_polyhedrons using a face-stream, rather than as hexs. I > cannot do this in the real code! The rest of the code is just there to > produce the “serial” mesh, and threshold this mesh to produce two > “parallel-partition” meshes. I use the new ghost type framework as this is > consistent with the real code, and this runs and compiles on OS X and gcc. > Likewise it has been build against vtk 6.3 and the bug manifests itself in > paraview 4.4 and 5.0. Visit 2.10 does not have this bug and can correctly > open the pvtu containing polyhedrons: this is my current workaround. > > Can any of the developers shed light on this? Is a fix known, if so when > will it be released? Do others have this problem [1, 2, 3] outside of > those long reported? Does anyone else have workarounds? > > Any help really appreciated, > Andy > > [1] http://public.kitware.com/pipermail/vtkusers/2015-May/090835.html > [2] https://cmake.org/pipermail/paraview/2012-October/026456.html > [3] https://cmake.org/pipermail/paraview/2015-January/032950.html > > > _______________________________________________ > Powered by www.kitware.com > > Visit other Kitware open-source projects at > http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html > > Please keep messages on-topic and check the VTK FAQ at: > http://www.vtk.org/Wiki/VTK_FAQ > > Search the list archives at: http://markmail.org/search/?q=vtkusers > > Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: > http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/vtkusers > >
_______________________________________________ Powered by www.kitware.com Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html Please keep messages on-topic and check the ParaView Wiki at: http://paraview.org/Wiki/ParaView Search the list archives at: http://markmail.org/search/?q=ParaView Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/paraview
