[petsc-users] PLEX depth stratum bug ?

[Dharmendar Reddy]

On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 11:18 AM, Matthew Knepley <knepley at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 11:05 PM, Dharmendar Reddy <dharmareddy84 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>          I am seeing inconsistent results using get stratum call.  For a
>> 2d mesh
>
>
> Sorry, I was swamped last week. You had not interpolated your mesh. I have
> included modified source:

Agreed, But if the mesh is not interpolated, depth = topological
dimension  (dim) should refer to dim-cells, is not that true ?
>
> Successfully created DM From Cell List
>  Successfully interpolated mesh
> DM_0x84000000_0 in 2 dimensions:
>   0-cells: 9
>   1-cells: 12
>   2-cells: 4
> Labels:
>   depth: 3 strata of sizes (9, 12, 4)
>  stratum size for value           1 is          12
> Number of indices in set 12
> 0 13
> 1 14
> 2 15
> 3 16
> 4 17
> 5 18
> 6 19
> 7 20
> 8 21
> 9 22
> 10 23
> 11 24
>  Node id start=           4 node id end=          12
>  edge id start=          13 edge id end=          24
>  element id start=           0 element id end=           3
>  printing the cell ids based on height stratum
>  element id start=           0 element id end=           3
>
>
>    Matt
>
>>
>> call DMPlexGetDepthStratum(dmMesh,2,globalidStart,globalidEnd,ierr)
>>
>> prints: globalIdStart = 0 and globalIdEnd = 0
>>
>>
>> where as
>>
>> call DMPlexGetHeightStratum(dmMesh,0,globalidStart,globalidEnd,ierr)
>>
>> prints globalIdStart = 0 and globalIdEnd = 4
>>
>> For a mesh with 4 cells. I have attached the test case. I am on petsc
>> version v3.4.3-2568-gb45093d
>
>
>
>
> --
> What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their experiments
> is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their experiments
> lead.
> -- Norbert Wiener