-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 75
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
WIP: Hdf5 for particle dumping #76
Conversation
…NL ATS-1 and CTS-1 machines. Document how to use these two scripts.
…ment starts out as the Cray default of PrgEnv-intel. This change checks for the case where the user has modified their module environment and swaps it back to the case assumed by the build script.
…le sort implementation. Add build script support for a few more CMake variables that were missing and should be availble to users of the build scripts.
…nodes and one for KNL nodes.
…xample deck agaisnt no hdf5
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## devel #76 +/- ##
===========================================
- Coverage 82.37% 63.81% -18.57%
===========================================
Files 114 115 +1
Lines 6904 10528 +3624
Branches 1074 1495 +421
===========================================
+ Hits 5687 6718 +1031
- Misses 768 3273 +2505
- Partials 449 537 +88
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
…rent ported apporach
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Howdy Bob,
Saw this and got worried. Are you adding the capability to have a global particle index while also retaining the local p->i index in the particle struct? I hope so. BTW, is this the right way to comment on a GitHub commit? Seems a bit different from the past scenario where you have requested me to review pull requests, etc.
Thanks,
Dave
@dnystrom1 yea this is a fine way to comment on github, especially if you want to specifically address my work to extend the file IO to support HDF5 I have two branches currently: This one -- where comments relating to "global id" are just so when we write the value of global_particle_id -- that adds a separate SoA that stores a globally unique id per particle It sounds like you're referring to the second above, got but got scared by comment referring to the (unrelated) first? Neither change at all how |
OK. Thanks. Good to know. |
…n global ids, accounting for ghosts
…t takes a sp name..
Replace by #80 |
No description provided.