itaps-parallel Questions about iMeshP

[Mark Shephard]

Saurabh,

SCOREC has a partial implementation that supported some mesh adaptation 
(no classification since we are still hoping for a direct way to do it). 
With Ting on leave, Alex and Seegyoung are the best contacts. As we go 
forward Seegyoung will be the key person.

Mark

Saurabh Tendulkar wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> We are trying to implement the iMeshP interface to our software. We have 
> the following questions and are hoping someone could help us with these:
> 
> 1. What does the mesh instance represent in iMeshP? Is it essentially 
> the on-process subset of entities of some global mesh? Where does the 
> control of the global mesh lie in this case? It does not appear to be 
> with the partition, as there can be multiple partitions of the same mesh.
> 
> 2. It appears that the mesh contains the entities and it is the 
> partition that controls how the entities lie in parts. This seems to 
> mean that an entity can be in the mesh but not in a part (for example, 
> when a part that contains entities is deleted). Is this fundamentally 
> disallowed? Because various aspects of iMeshP are not defined if this is 
> allowed. For example, if the entity was owned by the part that was 
> deleted, who owns the entity now? And, how does one know whether an 
> entity can be deleted from the mesh (next question)?
> 
> 3. Who controls the deletion of entities when they are no longer needed 
> on-process - eg. if they are migrated away, especially while keeping in 
> mind that there may be multiple partitions (the entity may be needed on 
> one and not on another).
> 
> 4. It is mentioned that a part can act as an entityset. Since entitysets 
> can have parent-child and containment relationships with other 
> entitysets, does this mean that parts need to have them too? If so, it 
> is undefined what this means with respect to the partitioning. If not, 
> what is the expected course of action when a part is used in an iMesh 
> entityset function call which would result in a hierarchical relationship?
> 
> 5. Is there an already existing implementation and a set of compliance 
> tests that can shed any light on these questions?
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> saurabh
>