-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 15
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Reflecting boundaries #339
Conversation
Co-authored-by: FG-TUM <[email protected]>
I went through the comments in the files Domain.* and ResultWriter.* and resolved them. double _universalProfiledComponentMass; // set from outside
double _universalLambda; // set from outside
float _globalDecisiveDensity; // set from outside |
I have no idea either, unfortunately Checking git history, seems like those lines have existed unchanged since 2012 (commit 9b1e251) |
After all these changes I redid the performance test, and the results don't seem impacted at all (I didn't rerun master):
LC (base ls1) seems less consistent somehow, maybe last time's runs got skewed by one bad run (possible because I'm testing on the minicluster). But in either case, no slowdowns from all the corrections. |
After fixing the implementation so that it actually works now, I reran the speed tests just for completeness's sake. Not much changed, so that's good.
|
Description
Added "native" support for reflecting and outflow boundaries in ls1.
The actual communication code was left untouched, and the boundary effects were manages with these two steps:
The communication code was not changed, because I did not want to mess up the inter-subdomain communication for internal molecules.
How Has This Been Tested?
Since this adds more checks for default (periodic) behaviour, I ran a test on the AMD minicluster to make sure that default behaviour is not slower.
configForBoundary.txt
jobForBoundary.txt
50000 steps, 485150 particles
I ran each run 5 times, took time values from the output files, averaged them, and here are the results (in seconds):
So compared to master, running periodic boundaries on this branch seems to have negligible overhead, hence performance should not be massively affected overall.
Otherwise, this has been more or less extensively tested, both with and without MaMiCo, so everything should be fine.