It solves the memory problem ! The JCF model was surely only on Luc's PC when you did this commit, and then the use of requestErase(id1,id2) was re-introduced when JCF code was commited after.
I'll commit the change in JCFpm soon, but why not erasing this (id1,id2) version from InteractionContainer ? I noticed these different versions, but could not deduce directly that there was right and wrong ones... For the question of erasing or not such interactions in JCFpm, I agree with you. Probably this will change after some discussion with other users. (but I don't think there might be another problem than performance : such interactions will have Fn=Ft=0 at their re-birth) -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Yade developers, which is subscribed to Yade. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1273775 Title: Too much memory used at creation/removal of interactions ? (JCFpm) Status in Yet Another Dynamic Engine: New Bug description: Hi, The problem is described here : https://answers.launchpad.net/yade/+question/242890 I'm attaching the script describing this simple compression, with the .spheres file (in a 2d comment) that is loaded to "ymport" the sample. In this script/in the on-line yade version, the number of interactions that were requested to erase, despite a geometrical overlap, is not accessible. Let me know if I forgot something to let run the simulation. Jérôme To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/yade/+bug/1273775/+subscriptions _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~yade-dev Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~yade-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
