[deal.II] Re: compile master without examples using Candi
that is correct. Alternatively, you can pass by this (and other) deal.II configuration in the candi.cfg variable here: #Choose configuration and components of deal.II DEAL_CONFOPTS="" -- 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 dealii+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [deal.II] Wrong result in use of FEEvaluation with different ConstraintMatrix objects
Dear Martin, Thank you for your quick reply. I understand my mistake now- the issue stems from "matrix_free_data.initialize_dof_vector(VECTOR_NAME, 1);" in the second case. I have used matrix_free_data.initialize_dof_vector(VECTOR_NAME, 0) in both cases which causes a mismatch with the argument in the FEEvaluation in the second case. I was not running on debug mode, which is why it didn't throw an error. I will use the dealii debug mode for such issues in the future. Thank you again, Best, Sambit On Saturday, December 2, 2017 at 6:57:26 AM UTC-6, Martin Kronbichler wrote: > > Dear Sambit, > > If the result of the two cases is different and > ConstraintMatrix::distribute() was called in both cases, I expect there > to be some confusion regarding the indices of ghost entries. In debug > mode, there should be a check that the parallel partitioner of the > vector inside FEEvaluation::read_dof_values* does match with the > expected index numbering. Did you run in debug mode? To localize the > issue, can you check whether you called > "matrix_free_data.initialize_dof_vector(VECTOR_NAME, 1);" in the second > case? Note the optional argument "1" that must match with the "1" passed > to FEEvaluation. If the issue still appears, it must be because > ConstraintMatrix::distribute() does not do all updates. In that case, I > would appreciate if you can give us a workable example. > > Best, > Martin > > -- 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 dealii+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [deal.II] Wrong result in use of FEEvaluation with different ConstraintMatrix objects
Dear Sambit, If the result of the two cases is different and ConstraintMatrix::distribute() was called in both cases, I expect there to be some confusion regarding the indices of ghost entries. In debug mode, there should be a check that the parallel partitioner of the vector inside FEEvaluation::read_dof_values* does match with the expected index numbering. Did you run in debug mode? To localize the issue, can you check whether you called "matrix_free_data.initialize_dof_vector(VECTOR_NAME, 1);" in the second case? Note the optional argument "1" that must match with the "1" passed to FEEvaluation. If the issue still appears, it must be because ConstraintMatrix::distribute() does not do all updates. In that case, I would appreciate if you can give us a workable example. Best, Martin -- 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 dealii+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
