GfsOutputSpectra - gerris-devel

The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Message from discussion GfsOutputSpectra
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of gfs-devel-boun...@lists.sourceforge.net designates 216.34.181.88 as permitted sender) client-ip=216.34.181.88;
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.220.175 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.220.175; envelope-from=dfus...@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-vx0-f175.google.com;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAOz=_RhY4Z8X9H0qoJ-gNXHiuEZEqFtvW8pTpfgE+iTLOPv...@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAP_p0Rd9iXT-4in0POGt4jyG1RNjZySoK_xnzfOi0O8=Np+...@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOz=_RicKpveEUPuHOhVotDfefETcpLhuJGLauHk_6qv+25...@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAP_p0Rf4DA6839aNmAXQwwhjnmN-NyicvdnwB0c8iH5e2g9...@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOz=_RjY2P6XdwhHfj2XCPmRwqOzbCr42oz6NuJASDA4weO...@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAP_p0RcuwzTZqpg69dgqGpCVaMfpuDqVopvRWxL0TB8YkLr...@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOz=_Rh6vnB-rqGFA0ZwW9OaO7CEzZH5HRndaU-0f2H2bb5...@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAP_p0Rd50shFb7Zz64nKr_UDxt6PvgtEAAasYc0RS6Gqnfw...@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOz=_RhY4Z8X9H0qoJ-gNXHiuEZEqFtvW8pTpfgE+iTLOPv...@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2011 02:09:33 +0200
Message-ID: <CAP_p0RdO3iWiLY1twf+tTMud+nvOWNkoLyxZQnWn5dVxmMi...@mail.gmail.com>
From: Daniel Fuster <dfus...@gmail.com>
To: GFS developper discussion list <gfs-de...@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Gfs-devel] GfsOutputSpectra
Precedence: list
Reply-To: GFS developper discussion list <gfs-de...@lists.sourceforge.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: gfs-devel-boun...@lists.sourceforge.net

Hi Stephane

> Hmm, I don't like this. You should not use cgd->N for storing
> something else than what it is.

Ok. This is fixed in the new patch I have pushed in my repository. I
have also written the doc in the wiki

I have also looked the parallel version but I am afraid it is not
going to be possible. It just allow parallelization in one direction.
http://www.fftw.org/fftw3_doc/2d-MPI-example.html#2d-MPI-example

 I could do something that works in specific cases but I do not see
the interest if it does not work for all cases. Maybe I should just
check the points inside the subdomain and perform several fft in
different subdomains.

Another option is to import the domain to proc 0 and to perform the
fft only in this proc.

Finally, the last option would be to redistribute the data in a way
that we could perform the parallel version of the fft, but I have a
lot of doubts about if this is really feasible.

best
Daniel

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable.
Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security
threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes
sense of it. IT sense. And common sense.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2dcopy2
_______________________________________________
Gfs-devel mailing list
Gfs-de...@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gfs-devel
Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
Account Options
