Thanks, Tim. I'll take a look in next few days. Utkarsh
On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 4:12 PM, Gallagher, Timothy P < tim.gallag...@gatech.edu> wrote: > I have to throw in the towel on this one for now and get back to some > other deadlines... but, I put what I have so far online and created a merge > request with information about the error and an example dataset attached. > > > Hopefully somebody better with VTK than I am can take a look and figure > out what I'm missing. I tried comparing the files for Chombo against the > original Visit source files to see if any special modifications were > required and none are (the only changes are HDF5 related). It looks like > the Chombo reader is from Visit 2.7.0 -- the Boxlib files I added are from > 2.10.3, but I tried it with the Boxlib reader from Visit 2.7.0 also and > it's the same issue. > > > If anybody has a chance to take a look, I'd appreciate it. Hopefully it's > something simple. If not, I'll try to pick it back up in a few days. I > apologize for the hacked CMakeLists to link against the library, I will fix > it to do it properly once everything else works! > > Tim > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* ParaView <paraview-boun...@paraview.org> on behalf of Gallagher, > Timothy P <tim.gallag...@gatech.edu> > *Sent:* Monday, August 29, 2016 12:41 PM > > *To:* Utkarsh Ayachit > *Cc:* paraview@paraview.org > *Subject:* Re: [Paraview] Status of BoxLib AMR reader > > > Thanks for the quick response, the case didn't match between the two files > and that was the issue. I'm able to use the reader to select the file and > it sees the names of the variables in it properly, but when I hit Apply it > throws: > > > ERROR: In > /data4/PVBoxLibTest/paraview/VTK/Common/DataModel/vtkAMRInformation.cxx, > line 573 > vtkAMRInformation (0x44210f0): Invalid grid description for a > vtkUniformGrid > > > I have a feeling this might get beyond my paraview knowledge to fix. > > > One potential source of the problem -- what version of Visit are the other > readers pulled from? I have the Boxlib files from the latest version, but > looking at some of the other readers, they are from older versions. > > The latest date I see in the copyright for existing readers is 2013 and > looking through the Visit Release notes, the last release in 2013 says it > was upgraded to use VTK-6.0. > > > Is it possible the bridge is based on Visit before that major VTK upgrade > and I need to pull the reader code from a version earlier than that? > > > Thanks for your help. If I can't find something I know how to fix soon, I > can create a merge request and see if anybody else can get it the rest of > the way. > > > Tim > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Utkarsh Ayachit <utkarsh.ayac...@kitware.com> > *Sent:* Monday, August 29, 2016 12:17 PM > *To:* Gallagher, Timothy P > *Cc:* paraview@paraview.org > *Subject:* Re: [Paraview] Status of BoxLib AMR reader > > Tim, > > It doesn't know what the class is. Multiple things could have gone wrong: > 1. is there call to ADD_VISIT_READER() for the new reader? > 2. does the case match between the XML's class="" and the name specified > in 1? > > If it makes it easier, create a MR on the https://gitlab.kitware. > com/paraview/visitbridge repo with your changes, and I can do the > necessary fixes. > <https://gitlab.kitware.com/paraview/visitbridge> > ParaView / VisItBridge <https://gitlab.kitware.com/paraview/visitbridge> > gitlab.kitware.com > Bridge between VisIt and ParaView to use VisIt readers in ParaView. > > Utkarsh > > On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 12:06 PM, Gallagher, Timothy P < > tim.gallag...@gatech.edu> wrote: > >> Utkarash, >> >> >> Thanks, I had added it to the xml file, but I didn't reconfigure (just >> rebuilt) so it didn't get added to the list. >> >> >> I'm making some progress it seems, it is picking the right reader now. >> But it is crashing with a rather unhelpful message: >> >> >> ERROR: In >> /data4/PVBoxLibTest/paraview/ParaViewCore/ServerImplementation/Core/vtkSIProxy.cxx, >> line 310 >> vtkSISourceProxy (0x3e87420): Failed to create vtkVisItBoxlib2DReader. >> Aborting for debugging purposes. >> >> I thought compiling with a Debug build type would give more verbose >> messages, but it's the same. >> >> >> Is there documentation or suggestions on debugging paraview? Is there a >> way to get more verbose output on why it isn't able to create the reader? >> >> >> Thanks again, >> >> >> Tim >> >> ------------------------------ >> *From:* Utkarsh Ayachit <utkarsh.ayac...@kitware.com> >> *Sent:* Monday, August 29, 2016 8:46 AM >> >> *To:* Gallagher, Timothy P >> *Cc:* paraview@paraview.org >> *Subject:* Re: [Paraview] Status of BoxLib AMR reader >> >> Tim, >> >> Did you also add it to visit_readers.xml [1]? The proxy definition should >> also have a <hints> section like so [2]. >> >> Utkarsh >> >> [1] https://gitlab.kitware.com/paraview/visitbridge/blob/mas >> ter/databases/visit_readers.xml >> [2] https://gitlab.kitware.com/paraview/visitbridge/blob/mas >> ter/databases/visit_readers.xml#L2562-2565 >> >> >> >> On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 6:26 PM, Gallagher, Timothy P < >> tim.gallag...@gatech.edu> wrote: >> >>> I took a stab at adding the Boxlib reader from the visit source to the >>> VisitBridge internal readers. I managed to get everything to compile and >>> link, Paraview built fine, but I can't seem to figure out how to make >>> Paraview aware the reader exists. >>> >>> >>> There isn't an option for Boxlib in the dropdown for the file type when >>> I try to open a file, and it doesn't appear as an available reader when I >>> try to select the file -- although all the others from the VisitBridge >>> appear. I missed a configuration file somewhere to make the file loading >>> aware of the reader. >>> >>> >>> Any suggestions on what I missed? I added a section in the >>> Utilities/VisItBridge/databases/visit_readers.xml file, but that wasn't >>> enough I guess. >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> >>> Tim >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> *From:* ParaView <paraview-boun...@paraview.org> on behalf of >>> Gallagher, Timothy P <tim.gallag...@gatech.edu> >>> *Sent:* Friday, August 26, 2016 11:53 AM >>> *To:* Utkarsh Ayachit >>> >>> *Cc:* paraview@paraview.org >>> *Subject:* Re: [Paraview] Status of BoxLib AMR reader >>> >>> >>> Hi Utkarsh, >>> >>> >>> I just checked with the latest head of the git repo and when I compile >>> with the VisitBridge, there are no readers for BoxLib built. >>> >>> >>> This page lists it as supported: http://www.paraview.org/ParaVi >>> ew/index.php/VisIt_avt_Integration >>> >>> >>> But then this later one doesn't include it: http://www.paraview.org/Wi >>> ki/VisIt_Database_Bridge >>> >>> >>> I have a dataset for you, I will send it off-list. >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> >>> Tim >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> *From:* Utkarsh Ayachit <utkarsh.ayac...@kitware.com> >>> *Sent:* Friday, August 26, 2016 8:35 AM >>> *To:* Gallagher, Timothy P >>> *Cc:* paraview@paraview.org >>> *Subject:* Re: [Paraview] Status of BoxLib AMR reader >>> >>> Tim, >>> >>> I am not exactly sure what's the status of the reader, but I can >>> certainly look it up. Do you have a sample dataset also to test that >>> it's working (or not)? >>> >>> Utkarsh >>> >>> On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 2:22 PM, Gallagher, Timothy P >>> <tim.gallag...@gatech.edu> wrote: >>> > Hi, >>> > >>> > >>> > Our code is moving away from traditional structured grids towards an >>> AMR >>> > capability using BoxLib. That means, unfortunately, that all of the >>> > development we have done to make our code Paraview and CoProcessing >>> friendly >>> > is not usable with the BoxLib file format. >>> > >>> > >>> > I have seen some information on various websites about using the >>> VisitBridge >>> > to add the readers from Visit into Paraview, but when I build with it, >>> the >>> > BoxLib reader was not included in the list of formats I could use for >>> files >>> > -- even though it is listed online. >>> > >>> > >>> > Does anybody know what the status is of the reader in PV and if it is >>> > usable? Or is there a different format we can try to write out from >>> our code >>> > that would be usable? I really don't want to lose the work we've done >>> with >>> > PV and I would rather spend time writing code to get things working >>> again >>> > for PV than learn to use new software! >>> > >>> > >>> > Thanks, >>> > >>> > >>> > Tim >>> > >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > Powered by www.kitware.com >>> <http://www.kitware.com/> >>> Kitware Inc. - leading edge, high-quality software >>> <http://www.kitware.com/> >>> www.kitware.com >>> Kitware's mission is to create state-of-the-art software products and >>> services in visualization and data processing using advanced quality >>> software methods and ... >>> >>> > >>> > Visit other Kitware open-source projects at >>> > http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html >>> > >>> > Please keep messages on-topic and check the ParaView Wiki at: >>> > http://paraview.org/Wiki/ParaView >>> > >>> > Search the list archives at: http://markmail.org/search/?q=ParaView >>> > >>> > Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: >>> > http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/paraview >>> > >>> >> >> >
_______________________________________________ Powered by www.kitware.com Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html Please keep messages on-topic and check the ParaView Wiki at: http://paraview.org/Wiki/ParaView Search the list archives at: http://markmail.org/search/?q=ParaView Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/paraview
