> From: x.peri...@rug.nl
> To: gmx-users@gromacs.org
> Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 17:36:49 +0100
> Subject: [gmx-users] angular removal of COM and domain decomposition
>
>
> Dears,
>
> mdrun complains when I am asking for the angular removal of the COM
> together
> with dynamic load balance on (with gmx-4.0.4). It says the combination
You mean domain decomposition.
> is not
> implemented and suggests to use particle decomposition, which is
> unfortunately
> much much slower.
>
> What would happen if the use of angular removal of the COM was
> "imposed" in a
> subroutine implemented in an in house version (mean field boundary
> potential)?
> The code does not through the check_dd_restrictions so it is actually
> running but
> it is actually difficult to see what the removal of the COM does.
>
> Anyone would have an idea? may be Berk?
>
> Thanks,
> XAvier.
What do you mean with "imposed"?
If you impose it correctly, it would of course work.
Berk
_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
gmx-users mailing list gmx-users@gromacs.org
http://www.gromacs.org/mailman/listinfo/gmx-users
Please search the archive at http://www.gromacs.org/search before posting!
Please don't post (un)subscribe requests to the list. Use the
www interface or send it to gmx-users-requ...@gromacs.org.
Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/mailing_lists/users.php
