On Wed, 28 Oct 2009, Roy Stogner wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Oct 2009, Tim Kroeger wrote:
>
>>> For isoparametric LAGRANGE elements, yes. For other elements, there
>>> is still a lot of redundancy, but there can be many different cases.
>>> Vertices, edges, faces, and volumes will have different numbers
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009, Tim Kroeger wrote:
>> For isoparametric LAGRANGE elements, yes. For other elements, there
>> is still a lot of redundancy, but there can be many different cases.
>> Vertices, edges, faces, and volumes will have different numbers of
>> components per variable, and likewise fo
Dear Derek/Roy,
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009, Derek Gaston wrote:
> On Oct 27, 2009, at 3:33 AM, Tim Kroeger wrote:
>
> Have you tried recompiling your application in 32-bit to make sure that's the
> problem? Even on a 64bit machine you can compile for a 32bit target and
> everything will run fine. Ha
On Oct 27, 2009, at 3:33 AM, Tim Kroeger wrote:
> I see. Anyway, at least it should be possible to replace some of the
> pointers with ints or short ints (or perhaps chars). I mean, one
> could make the arrays one-dimensional and then manage an array of
> offsets for the systems instead. Since
On Mon, 26 Oct 2009, Roy Stogner wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009, Tim Kroeger wrote:
>
>> 3. _n_v_comp should have identical entries for each DofObject in the
>> mesh
>
> For isoparametric LAGRANGE elements, yes. For other elements, there
> is still a lot of redundancy, but there can be many differe
On Mon, 26 Oct 2009, Tim Kroeger wrote:
> 3. _n_v_comp should have identical entries for each DofObject in the
> mesh
For isoparametric LAGRANGE elements, yes. For other elements, there
is still a lot of redundancy, but there can be many different cases.
Vertices, edges, faces, and volumes will
Dear Kai and all,
On Mon, 26 Oct 2009, Liu Kai wrote:
> I guess the reason may be from the pointer length difference between
> 32 bit and 64 bit. Many pointers are stored in Elem data structure. So
> this amount will double after switching 32 bit to 64 bit.
Let me try to find out what this m
Hi,
I guess the reason may be from the pointer length difference between
32 bit and 64 bit. Many pointers are stored in Elem data structure. So
this amount will double after switching 32 bit to 64 bit.
This is just a guess. Any comments are appreciated.
Best regards,
Kai
Tim Kroeger 写道:
Dear all,
After switching from 32 bit to 64 bit, I notice that my application
requires essentially more memory than before. I am not 100% sure that
the 32->64 bit switch is the decisive change since during my vacation
in September there might have been more changes in other parts of our
insit
