[petsc-users] DMPlex partition problem

[Danyang Su]

From: Matthew Knepley <knepley at gmail.com>
Date: Wednesday, April 8, 2020 at 6:45 AM
To: Danyang Su <danyang.su at gmail.com>
Cc: PETSc <petsc-users at mcs.anl.gov>
Subject: Re: [petsc-users] DMPlex partition problem

 

On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 7:25 AM Matthew Knepley <knepley at gmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 12:48 AM Danyang Su <danyang.su at gmail.com> wrote:

Dear All,

 

Hope you are safe and healthy.

 

I have a question regarding pretty different partition results of prism mesh. The partition in PETSc generates much more ghost nodes/cells than the partition in Gmsh, even though both use metis as partitioner. Attached please find the prism mesh in both vtk and exo format, the test code modified based on ex1f90 example. Similar problem are observed for larger dataset with more layers.

 

I will figure this out by next week.

 

I have run your mesh and do not get those weird partitions. I am running in master. What are you using? Also, here is an easy way

to do this using a PETSc test:

 

cd $PETSC_DIR

make -f ./gmakefile test globsearch="dm_impls_plex_tests-ex1_cylinder" EXTRA_OPTIONS="-filename ${HOME}/Downloads/basin2layer.exo -dm_view hdf5:$PWD/mesh.h5 -dm_partition_view" NP=5 

./lib/petsc/bin/petsc_gen_xdmf.py mesh.h5

 

and then load mesh.xmf into Paraview. Here is what I see (attached). Is it possible for you to try the master branch?

 

Hi Matt,

 

Thanks for your quick response. If I use your script, the partition looks good, as shown in the attached figure. I am working on PETSc 3.13.0 release version on Mac OS. 

 

Does the above script use code /petsc/src/dm/label/tutorials/ex1c.c?

 

  Thanks,

 

    Matt

 

  Thanks,

 

     Matt

 

For example, in Gmsh, I get partition results using two processors and four processors as shown below, which are pretty reasonable.

 

 

However, in PETSc, the partition looks a bit weird. Looks like it takes layer partition first and then inside layer. If the number of nodes per layer is very large, this kind of partitioning results into much more ghost nodes/cells. 

 

Anybody know how to improve the partitioning in PETSc? I have tried parmetis and chaco. There is no big difference between them. 

 

 

 

Thanks,

 

Danyang

 


 

-- 

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/


 

-- 

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/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20200408/7fad77ab/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 457828 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20200408/7fad77ab/attachment-0003.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 542678 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20200408/7fad77ab/attachment-0004.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: image/png
Size: 349309 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20200408/7fad77ab/attachment-0005.png>