> On Nov 20, 2024, at 2:38 PM, MIGUEL MOLINOS PEREZ <mmoli...@us.es> wrote: > > Yes, I use the vertex (nodes) of the elements.
Then the length between each vertex will be different between periodic and non-periodic case. With 10 points and non-periodic, it will be 1/9, and with periodic it will be 1/10th. Is this what you are asking about? > > I am using the DMDA as an auxiliar mesh to do the domain partitioning in the > DMSWARM. > > Thanks, > Miguel > > > >> On 20 Nov 2024, at 19:54, Barry Smith <bsm...@petsc.dev> wrote: >> >> >> Are you considering your degrees of freedom as vertex or cell-centered? >> >> Say three "elements" per edge. >> >> If vertex centered then discretization size is 1/3 if periodic and >> 1/2 if not periodic >> >> If cell-centered then each cell has width 1/3 for both periodic and >> not periodic >> >> but in both cases you can think of the discretization size as constant >> along the whole cube edge. >> >> Is this related to DMSWARM in particular? >> >>> On Nov 20, 2024, at 12:56 PM, MIGUEL MOLINOS PEREZ <mmoli...@us.es> wrote: >>> >>> I mean that if the dimensions of the cube are 1x1x1 (for example). And I >>> want 10 elements per edge, the discretization size must be 0.1 constant >>> over the whole cube edge. >>> >>> This is not in the code, I just impose the number of elements per edge. >>> >>> Thank you, >>> Miguel >>> >>>> On 20 Nov 2024, at 18:52, Barry Smith <bsm...@petsc.dev> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> What do you mean by discretization size, and how do I see it in the code? >>>> >>>> Barry >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Nov 20, 2024, at 12:48 PM, MIGUEL MOLINOS PEREZ <mmoli...@us.es> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Sorry, I meant that the discretisation size is not constant across the >>>>> edges of the cube. >>>>> >>>>> Miguel >>>>> >>>>>> On 20 Nov 2024, at 18:36, Barry Smith <bsm...@petsc.dev> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> 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> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >