[petsc-dev] DMDA VTK viewer regression: field names missing

Matthew Knepley knepley at gmail.com
Thu Apr 4 05:53:51 CDT 2019

On Thu, Apr 4, 2019 at 12:26 AM Jed Brown via petsc-dev <
petsc-dev at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:

> Patrick Sanan via petsc-dev <petsc-dev at mcs.anl.gov> writes:
> > I was going to say something similar to Matt; to me it is worth the 1.5x
> > redundancy in the data if I can just view the output file with "doing
> > anything special". I have also done something similar to what you're
> > describing with save states, and it works fine; weirdly it seems like
> much
> > higher overhead than it is, though.
> That overhead for 2D fields isn't a big deal for me, but how would you
> identify that three components should be interpreted as vectors?  What
> if they are three chemical concentrations?  Plotting as vectors would
> just be confusing in that case.

In PyLith, we annotate solution fields with transformation properties like


> > Here's what I'd propose:  too ugly and convoluted?
> > - If the user has set any custom field names for the DMDA, interpret that
> > to mean that they want to deal with them individually, so use the old
> > behavior (but incorporate Dave's comments on improving the field names)
> > - Otherwise, assume that the user wants the new (current) behavior
> > - Document this stuff as much as possible to try to avoid confusion
> I think this sounds good.

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

https://www.cse.buffalo.edu/~knepley/ <http://www.cse.buffalo.edu/~knepley/>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20190404/a020a0b0/attachment.html>

More information about the petsc-dev mailing list