[Developers] Need a Working BAM_Elliptic and EllPETSc

[Zach Etienne]

Erik,

Thanks for your help!

The way Cactus developers use CVS is a little foreign to me, since most open source groups that use CVS will provide tarballs of stable releases and will refer interested users/developers to their CVS tree for the bleeding-edge development source code.

Turns out, I was using the latest cvs.cactuscode.org:/cactus version of the code (which I _thought_ was the latest development version).  I suppose this was the most recent _stable_ Cactus release.  I just downloaded and compiled (!) the latest ...:/cactusdevcvs version with BAM_Elliptic, and it looks like BAM_Elliptic now runs, without crashing!

If I have problems with EllPETSc and the latest development version (recompiling PETSc now), I'll send another email.

Again, thanks!
-Zach


Erik Schnetter <schnetter at cct.lsu.edu> wrote: On Mar 6, 2007, at 12:52:49, Zach Etienne wrote:

> Hello.
>
> We (the Illinois group) need an elliptic solver in Cactus.  Thus  
> far, we have found that with our version of Cactus+AEIThorns  
> (latest publicly available CVS from cactuscode.org and  
> cvs.aei.mpg.de) neither BAM_Elliptic nor EllPETSc will work  
> properly.  Ideally, we would like to use either.

Hi Zach,

I'm sorry to hear you have problems.

> I've detailed our problems with these two thorns in the below  
> sections.
>
> -= BAM_Elliptic Problems =-
> BAM_Elliptic compiles just fine, but when I try to run it, it gives:
> WARNING level 0 in thorn BAM_Elliptic processor 0
>   (line 294 of /.../Cactus/configs/.../build/BAM_Elliptic/ 
> Cactus4_utils.c):
>   -> BAM requires PUGH::processor_topology to be set to "manual" or  
> "automatic_old"
> When I do what the warning suggests, I get a segfault (when  
> attempting to set the topology to manual) or "Range error setting  
> parameter 'PUGH::processor_topology' to 'automatic_old'" (when  
> attempting to set the topology to automatic_old).  Looking at the  
> source code, I conclude that this problem appears to be caused by a  
> bugfix inside BAM_Elliptic/src/Cactus4_utils.c.
>
> Cry for help:
> Does anyone have a version of BAM_Elliptic that does not have this  
> issue with the latest PUGH?

Are you using the development version of Cactus, or the stable  
release?  See  for the  
distinction.

> -= EllPETSc Problems =-
> Apparently the PETSc API has changed since the current CVS version  
> of EllPETSc was written.  With the latest version of PETSc  
> (petsc-2.3.2-p8), EllPETSc will not even compile, giving the error:
> /.../Cactus/configs/.../build/EllPETSc/petsc_confmetric_solver.c 
> (1046): error #165: too few arguments in function call
>     ierr = SLESSolve(sles,b,soln,&its); CHKERRQ(ierr);
>
> Cry for help:
> Does anyone have a version of EllPETSc that works with the latest  
> version of Cactus?  At the very least, does anyone know what  
> version of PETSc EllPETSc was designed to work with?

The PETSc interface changes quite often.  I recently committed a  
change to the development version of Cactus that should make EllPETSc  
work with PETSc 2.3.2.  Are you using the stable release of Cactus or  
the development version?  Can you try the development version?

EllPETSc should work with PETSc 2.2.x.

-erik

-- 
Erik Schnetter 

My email is as private as my paper mail.  I therefore support encrypting
and signing email messages.  Get my PGP key from www.keyserver.net.



_______________________________________________
Developers mailing list
Developers at cactuscode.org
http://www.cactuscode.org/mailman/listinfo/developers


 
---------------------------------
Bored stiff? Loosen up...
Download and play hundreds of games for free on Yahoo! Games.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.cactuscode.org/pipermail/developers/attachments/20070306/e5788c70/attachment.html