I am sorry, I don't understand the problem. When I run by default with -da_view I get
Processor [0] M 3 N 3 P 3 m 2 n 2 p 2 w 1 s 1 X range of indices: 0 2, Y range of indices: 0 2, Z range of indices: 0 2 Processor [1] M 3 N 3 P 3 m 2 n 2 p 2 w 1 s 1 X range of indices: 2 3, Y range of indices: 0 2, Z range of indices: 0 2 Processor [2] M 3 N 3 P 3 m 2 n 2 p 2 w 1 s 1 X range of indices: 0 2, Y range of indices: 2 3, Z range of indices: 0 2 Processor [3] M 3 N 3 P 3 m 2 n 2 p 2 w 1 s 1 X range of indices: 2 3, Y range of indices: 2 3, Z range of indices: 0 2 Processor [4] M 3 N 3 P 3 m 2 n 2 p 2 w 1 s 1 X range of indices: 0 2, Y range of indices: 0 2, Z range of indices: 2 3 Processor [5] M 3 N 3 P 3 m 2 n 2 p 2 w 1 s 1 X range of indices: 2 3, Y range of indices: 0 2, Z range of indices: 2 3 Processor [6] M 3 N 3 P 3 m 2 n 2 p 2 w 1 s 1 X range of indices: 0 2, Y range of indices: 2 3, Z range of indices: 2 3 Processor [7] M 3 N 3 P 3 m 2 n 2 p 2 w 1 s 1 X range of indices: 2 3, Y range of indices: 2 3, Z range of indices: 2 3 which seems right because you are trying to have three cells in each direction. The distribution has to be uneven, hence 0 2 and 2 3 When I change the code to use ndiv_mesh_* = 4 and run with periodic or not I get $ PETSC_OPTIONS="" mpiexec -n 8 ./atoms-3D -dm_view DM Object: 8 MPI processes type: da Processor [0] M 4 N 4 P 4 m 2 n 2 p 2 w 1 s 1 X range of indices: 0 2, Y range of indices: 0 2, Z range of indices: 0 2 Processor [1] M 4 N 4 P 4 m 2 n 2 p 2 w 1 s 1 X range of indices: 2 4, Y range of indices: 0 2, Z range of indices: 0 2 Processor [2] M 4 N 4 P 4 m 2 n 2 p 2 w 1 s 1 X range of indices: 0 2, Y range of indices: 2 4, Z range of indices: 0 2 Processor [3] M 4 N 4 P 4 m 2 n 2 p 2 w 1 s 1 X range of indices: 2 4, Y range of indices: 2 4, Z range of indices: 0 2 Processor [4] M 4 N 4 P 4 m 2 n 2 p 2 w 1 s 1 X range of indices: 0 2, Y range of indices: 0 2, Z range of indices: 2 4 Processor [5] M 4 N 4 P 4 m 2 n 2 p 2 w 1 s 1 X range of indices: 2 4, Y range of indices: 0 2, Z range of indices: 2 4 Processor [6] M 4 N 4 P 4 m 2 n 2 p 2 w 1 s 1 X range of indices: 0 2, Y range of indices: 2 4, Z range of indices: 2 4 Processor [7] M 4 N 4 P 4 m 2 n 2 p 2 w 1 s 1 X range of indices: 2 4, Y range of indices: 2 4, Z range of indices: 2 4 so it is splitting as expected each rank gets a 2 by 2 by 2 set of indices. Could you please let me know what the problem is that I should be seeing. Barry > On Nov 20, 2024, at 7:06 AM, MIGUEL MOLINOS PEREZ <mmoli...@us.es> wrote: > > Dear Barry, > > Please, find attached to this email a minimal example of the problem. Run it > using 8 MPI processes. > > Thanks, > Miguel > > > > > >> On 20 Nov 2024, at 11:48, Miguel Molinos <mmoli...@us.es> wrote: >> >> Hi Bary: >> >> I will check the example you suggest. Anyhow, I’ll send a reproducible >> example ASAP. >> >> Thanks, >> Miguel >> >>> On 19 Nov 2024, at 18:55, Barry Smith <bsm...@petsc.dev> wrote: >>> >>> >>> I modify src/dm/tests/ex25.c and always see a nice even split when >>> possible with both DM_BOUNDARY_NONE and DM_BOUNDARY_PERIODIC >>> >>> Can you please send a reproducible example? >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> Barry >>> >>> >>>> On Nov 19, 2024, at 6:14 AM, MIGUEL MOLINOS PEREZ <mmoli...@us.es> wrote: >>>> >>>> Dear all: >>>> >>>> It seems that if I mesh a cubic domain with “DMDACreate3d” using 8 bricks >>>> for discretization and with periodic boundaries, each of the bricks has a >>>> different size. In contrast, if I use DM_BOUNDARY_NONE, all 8 bricks have >>>> the same size. >>>> >>>> I have used this together with the DMSWarm discretization. And as you can >>>> see the number of particles per rank is not evenly distributed: >>>> 210 420 366 732 420 840 732 1464 >>>> >>>> Am I missing something? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Miguel >>>> >>>> >>>> <Screenshot 2024-11-19 at 10.56.36.png> >>> >> > > <atoms-3D.cpp><Mg-hcp-cube-x17-x10-x10.dump>
