itaps-parallel More questions on iMeshP

[Onkar Sahni]

As Jason mentioned, due to all-to-all communication and size of array it
was decided to not have process-to-parts mapping, especially in cases
where one can have non-uniform number of parts across processes (I think
this possibility is allowed)?

As per last discussions, Part IDs will be globally unique but not
necessarily consecutive (see iMeshP.h)

- Onkar

>>
>> These are just returning the part wrt an entity (ownership/copy) or
>> neighboring a part. Isn't there anything that returns them in a global
>> sense (eg. return all part ids on process with given rank)?
>>
>
> There doesn't appear to be.  It seems that there should be a
> iMeshP_getGlobalParts, as we have: iMeshP_getNumGlobalParts,
> iMeshP_getNumLocalParts, and iMeshP_getLocalParts.  On the other hand,
> that's typically all-to-all communication and perhaps the intent was to
> discourage it.  It also may not scale well to very large machines for
> other
> reasons (big array to hold all part ids.)  Perhaps you could just assume
> that parts have consecutive IDs (which I think is the case for all
> implementations), and therefore assume that the global part list is 1 to
> n,
> where n is the result of iMeshP_getNumGlobalParts.
>
> - jason
>
>