Re: [Paraview] Performance of the CGNS Reader
Thank you for this answer, Mickael. My 1.36 Gb CGNS dataset is built from structured meshes and Paraview should not 'eat' too much memory. I have checked that enabling multi-core in Paraview does not change anything: PV always needs about 15 mn to load my dataset, same loading time as without multi-core. I think that the loading time ratio 15 mn / 1 mn for PV against Tecplot remains too high, even if PV parses the file two times. If Tecplot takes advantage from multi-core (I don't know), the loading time ratio between PV and Tecplot should not excess 8 when using 4 CPUs. A ratio of 15 leading to 15 mn of loading time or more for larger datasets is unacceptable for interactivity. So PV is unusable for large CGNS datasets, unless using batch mode. I think that an effort in redesigning the CGNS reader would be welcome. Best regards. Richard Le 29/08/2013 20:55, Mickael Philit a écrit : Hello, First, the CGNS reader coming through the VisItBridge is not working in parallel, it's a plain serial reader. Second, there are limitations to the current cgns reader way of doing thing, since : - At the beginning, it parses the whole file (this takes a lot of time) to get variable names, blocks and so on, before actually reading the data. [ I think that tecplot is cleaner because it seems to read the whole CGNS file in one pass ] - meshes are read in a temporary array and converted to a VTK vector of coordinates (thus memory manipulation) - for unstructured meshes, convertion from 'integer' to 'long' of cells connectivity eats memory. The CGNS reader can improve but at the cost of redesining some parts to fit better in paraview and go for parallel. Mickael On 29/08/2013 16:50, Angelini, Richard C (Rick) CIV USARMY ARL (US) wrote: As a followup to this that may be related - does the CGNS reader through the VisItBridge work in parallel?I've loaded up a couple of different CGNS datasets and then applied the ProcessIDScalars filter and it doesn't appear to be distributing the data - even multi-block CGNS files. Rick Angelini USArmy Research Laboratory CISD/HPC Architectures Team Building 120 Cube 315 Phone: 410-278-6266 From: paraview-boun...@paraview.org [paraview-boun...@paraview.org] on behalf of Richard GRENON [richard.gre...@onera.fr] Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 10:38 AM To: paraview@paraview.org Subject: [Paraview] Performance of the CGNS Reader Hello. I am testing the CGNS reader of Paraview 4.0.1 64 bits running on a Linux Workstation having 4 CPUs and 5.8 Gbytes of memory. Paraview was installed from the binaries available on the download page. I am trying to load a 1.36 Gbytes CGNS file that is available through the network. While loading this file, the Paraview Windows is frozen and cannot be refreshed, and I must check with the ps command on a terminal window or with a system monitor if PV is still running or if it is really frozen. A progress bar for all readers would be welcome in a next release. Finally, the file can be loaded, but it always takes about 15 mn (+ or - 1 mn depending of the load of the network), while Tecplot always loads the same file within less that 1 mn ! How do you explain this poor performance of the CGNS reader ? Can it be improved, or am I missing something ? Is there some Paraview option that could reduce loading time of large files ? Best regards -- Richard GRENON ONERA Departement d'Aerodynamique Appliquee - DAAP/ACI 8 rue des Vertugadins 92190 MEUDON - FRANCE phone : +33 1 46 73 42 17 fax : +33 1 46 73 41 46 mailto:richard.gre...@onera.fr http://www.onera.fr ___ 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 Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://www.paraview.org/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 Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://www.paraview.org/mailman/listinfo/paraview -- Richard GRENON ONERA Departement d'Aerodynamique Appliquee - DAAP/ACI 8 rue des Vertugadins 92190 MEUDON - FRANCE phone : +33 1 46 73 42 17 fax : +33 1 46 73 41 46 mailto:richard.gre...@onera.fr http://www.onera.fr ___ 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 Follow this link to
[Paraview] pvserver with POE
Hi, I have some difficulties to use pvserver running under IBM's native Parallel Operating Environment (POE). It looks like pvserver is failing to opening up a server-socket to which the paraview clients are expected. $ poe pvserver -procs 2 produce the following error message: Waiting for client... Connection URL: cs://ada258:1 Waiting for client... Connection URL: cs://ada258:1 Accepting connection(s): ada258:1 ERROR: In /smplocal/src/pub/Paraview/3.9.8-par/src/VTK/Common/System/vtkSocket.cxx, line 206 vtkServerSocket (0x127b170): Socket error in call to bind. Address already in use. ERROR: In /smplocal/src/pub/Paraview/3.9.8-par/src/ParaViewCore/ClientServerCore/Core/vtkTCPNetworkAccessManager.cxx, line 354 vtkTCPNetworkAccessManager (0x11eba20): Failed to set up server socket. Exiting... It's work fine with mpirun (Intel MPI Library) $ mpirun -np 2 pvserver Waiting for client... Connection URL: cs://ada337:1 Accepting connection(s): ada337:1 Any ideas ? ___ 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 Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://www.paraview.org/mailman/listinfo/paraview
Re: [Paraview] Building on Titan using ParaViewSuperbuild
Hi,
Can you let me know whether it is BG P or BG Q on which catalyst was built.
Thanks,
Benson
On 30/08/2013 11:24, paraview-requ...@paraview.org wrote:
1. Re: Building on Titan using ParaViewSuperbuild (David E DeMarle)
--
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2013 16:08:13 -0400
From: David E DeMarle dave.dema...@kitware.com
Subject: Re: [Paraview] Building on Titan using ParaViewSuperbuild
To: Vanmoer, Mark W mvanm...@illinois.edu
Cc: paraview@paraview.org paraview@paraview.org
Message-ID:
canjzai-1k+bflglevpeqdau+wpt-aqku0azddce4kcd-rot...@mail.gmail.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 3:51 PM, Vanmoer, Mark W mvanm...@illinois.eduwrote:
So coprocessing will not be built using the below instructions? I would
have mentioned that, but coprocessing appears to
still be part of a regular, non-cross-compile build, so I figured it was
part of ENABLE_paraview
The coprocessing plugin, which adds things to the GUI to make it easy to
record coprocessing pipeline setups doesn't need to be turned on since that
lives in the client only. (It is like python trace or state recording, but
tailored to recording in-situ setups).
Catalyst (the stripped down version of ParaView server that a simulation
code can link to and use to run those recorded pipelines quickly) is not
yet an option in ParaViewSuperbuild. To cross compile Catalyst a bit more
work will be required. It will follow the same plan as how the ParaView
server is compiled, but I just haven't tried it. When I did cross compile
Catalyst last year at this time I did the same steps that
ParaViewSuperbuild's TOOLS and CROSS build passes did, just by hand.
Also, for the below configcross.sh, do we need to pass in a CMake variable
telling it where the tools build dir is located?
That should be an option that you can easily set, but it isn't sorry.
CMake/CrossCompilationMacros.cmake assumes it can find it one directory up
and over like so:
macro(find_hosttools)
set(PARAVIEW_HOSTTOOLS_DIR
${CMAKE_BINARY_DIR}/../tools/paraview/src/paraview-build/ CACHE PATH
Location of host built paraview compile tools directory)
set(PYTHON_HOST_EXE ${CMAKE_BINARY_DIR}/../tools/install/bin/python CACHE
PATH
Location of host built python executable)
set(PYTHON_HOST_LIBDIR ${CMAKE_BINARY_DIR}/../tools/install/lib CACHE PATH
Location of host built python libraries)
set(BOOST_HOST_INCLUDEDIR ${CMAKE_BINARY_DIR}/../tools/install/include
CACHE PATH
Location of host built boost headers)
endmacro()
You could predefine all four of those if you like.
Thanks,
Mark
** **
*From:* David E DeMarle [mailto:dave.dema...@kitware.com]
*Sent:* Thursday, August 29, 2013 1:41 PM
*To:* Hong Yi
*Cc:* Vanmoer, Mark W; paraview@paraview.org
*Subject:* Re: [Paraview] Building on Titan using ParaViewSuperbuild
** **
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 2:13 PM, Hong Yi hon...@renci.org wrote:
Hi David,
I just started to try superbuild on Titan also. I don't see you set
ENABLE_MPI to be true in your configure script. Could you confirm whether
ENABLE_MPI needs to be set to TRUE in order for ParaView to run on Titan in
parallel? Since my purpose is to link our
** **
The ENABLE_MPI flag at the Superbuild level is unrelated. It has a purpose
only when CROSS_BUILD_STAGE=HOST, that is when making ParaView binary
installers for desktops from Superbuild.
** **
You shouldn't turn it on in the TOOLS or CROSS stages. Instead let the
CROSS stage use the system installed MPI. It does that by turning
PARAVIEW_USE_MPI=ON when it configures the ParaView sub-build. See
CMake/crosscompile/xk7_gnu to see where it does that, and to see the other
flags it uses.
simulation code (already built statically with CMake on Titan) to
ParaView CoProcessing libraries (I am using version 3.98.1) for in-situ
visualization on Titan, so in this case, do I have to set ENABLE_paraview
to true and do I need to enable OSMesa for ParaView to resort to off-screen
rendering for in-situ visualization?
** **
The CROSS stage turns on Python, Mesa and ParaView. Titan's accelerators
don't really run X11, so Mesa is the only option for rendering there.
** **
Although I can build ParaView from source on Titan login nodes, I am not
able to run it on compute nodes, so I am starting to try superbuild hoping
to be able to cross build ParaView libraries to run in-situ visualization
on Titan.
** **
I've cross compiled Catalyst itself before on a bluegene. I did it
manually before SuperBuild existed. I will see if I can dig up my config
scripts. Cross compiling Catalyst should be more or less that same thing as
cross compiling ParaView, but a bit faster and easier because their is less
code involved.
** **
Thanks,
Hong
--
[Paraview] Volume Rendering Crash
Dear Paraview Community, I am volume rendering a 2560 x 2160 x 200 image stack that totals 2 GB in size. The stack loads fine, Paraview consistently crashes when I try to render the whole volume. The data is represented as a uniform grid. I don't think this is a memory issue. I have monitored memory usage during crashes and the system always has at least 29 GB of free memory when it crashes. The behavior is the same regardless of which rendering algorithm I choose (smart, ray cast, texture mapping, GPU). I have tried loading the data in both RAW format and NRRD format with no luck. I am using the Linux 64 bit binary installation from the Paraview website. My desktop is running CentOS. I'd appreciate any advice you might have for me. Thanks, Cody ___ 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 Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://www.paraview.org/mailman/listinfo/paraview
Re: [Paraview] Building on Titan using ParaViewSuperbuild
I tried to follow the instructions and the configuration scripts to build
ParaView for compute nodes on Titan. It built successfully without issues for
the TOOLS stage, but when doing final linking for paraview in the CROSS stage,
I got numerous similar linking error from different lines such as the following:
/../ParaView/ParaViewSuperbuild/cross/paraview/src/paraview/Utilities/mpi4py/src/mpi4py.MPI.c:
In function '__pyx_pf_6mpi4py_3MPI_4File_54Sync':
/../ParaView/ParaViewSuperbuild/cross/paraview/src/paraview/Utilities/mpi4py/src/mpi4py.MPI.c:89682:7:
error: '_save' undeclared (first use in this function)
The same error message were raised from the same file mpi4py.MPI.c from
different lines.
I am using CMake version 2.8.10.2 which is provided by Titan, and using the
ParaView source tree version 3.98 with one additional filter I have developed.
Any idea on what could cause the linking error?
Thanks,
Hong
From: David E DeMarle [dave.dema...@kitware.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 4:08 PM
To: Vanmoer, Mark W
Cc: Hong Yi; paraview@paraview.org
Subject: Re: [Paraview] Building on Titan using ParaViewSuperbuild
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 3:51 PM, Vanmoer, Mark W
mvanm...@illinois.edumailto:mvanm...@illinois.edu wrote:
So coprocessing will not be built using the below instructions? I would have
mentioned that, but coprocessing appears to
still be part of a regular, non-cross-compile build, so I figured it was part
of ENABLE_paraview
The coprocessing plugin, which adds things to the GUI to make it easy to record
coprocessing pipeline setups doesn't need to be turned on since that lives in
the client only. (It is like python trace or state recording, but tailored to
recording in-situ setups).
Catalyst (the stripped down version of ParaView server that a simulation code
can link to and use to run those recorded pipelines quickly) is not yet an
option in ParaViewSuperbuild. To cross compile Catalyst a bit more work will be
required. It will follow the same plan as how the ParaView server is compiled,
but I just haven't tried it. When I did cross compile Catalyst last year at
this time I did the same steps that ParaViewSuperbuild's TOOLS and CROSS build
passes did, just by hand.
Also, for the below configcross.sh, do we need to pass in a CMake variable
telling it where the tools build dir is located?
That should be an option that you can easily set, but it isn't sorry.
CMake/CrossCompilationMacros.cmake assumes it can find it one directory up and
over like so:
macro(find_hosttools)
set(PARAVIEW_HOSTTOOLS_DIR
${CMAKE_BINARY_DIR}/../tools/paraview/src/paraview-build/ CACHE PATH
Location of host built paraview compile tools directory)
set(PYTHON_HOST_EXE ${CMAKE_BINARY_DIR}/../tools/install/bin/python CACHE PATH
Location of host built python executable)
set(PYTHON_HOST_LIBDIR ${CMAKE_BINARY_DIR}/../tools/install/lib CACHE PATH
Location of host built python libraries)
set(BOOST_HOST_INCLUDEDIR ${CMAKE_BINARY_DIR}/../tools/install/include CACHE
PATH
Location of host built boost headers)
endmacro()
You could predefine all four of those if you like.
Thanks,
Mark
From: David E DeMarle
[mailto:dave.dema...@kitware.commailto:dave.dema...@kitware.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 1:41 PM
To: Hong Yi
Cc: Vanmoer, Mark W; paraview@paraview.orgmailto:paraview@paraview.org
Subject: Re: [Paraview] Building on Titan using ParaViewSuperbuild
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 2:13 PM, Hong Yi
hon...@renci.orgmailto:hon...@renci.org wrote:
Hi David,
I just started to try superbuild on Titan also. I don't see you set ENABLE_MPI
to be true in your configure script. Could you confirm whether ENABLE_MPI needs
to be set to TRUE in order for ParaView to run on Titan in parallel? Since my
purpose is to link our
The ENABLE_MPI flag at the Superbuild level is unrelated. It has a purpose only
when CROSS_BUILD_STAGE=HOST, that is when making ParaView binary installers for
desktops from Superbuild.
You shouldn't turn it on in the TOOLS or CROSS stages. Instead let the CROSS
stage use the system installed MPI. It does that by turning PARAVIEW_USE_MPI=ON
when it configures the ParaView sub-build. See CMake/crosscompile/xk7_gnu to
see where it does that, and to see the other flags it uses.
simulation code (already built statically with CMake on Titan) to ParaView
CoProcessing libraries (I am using version 3.98.1) for in-situ visualization on
Titan, so in this case, do I have to set ENABLE_paraview to true and do I need
to enable OSMesa for ParaView to resort to off-screen rendering for in-situ
visualization?
The CROSS stage turns on Python, Mesa and ParaView. Titan's accelerators don't
really run X11, so Mesa is the only option for rendering there.
Although I can build ParaView from source on Titan login nodes, I am not able
to run it on compute nodes, so I am starting to try
Re: [Paraview] Building on Titan using ParaViewSuperbuild
Hi Hong,
I was able to get David's instructions to work using CMake 2.8.11.2 and
ParaView 4.0.1. The build process seems to be sensitive to versions.
Mark
From: Hong Yi [mailto:hon...@renci.org]
Sent: Friday, August 30, 2013 3:52 PM
To: David E DeMarle; Vanmoer, Mark W
Cc: paraview@paraview.org
Subject: RE: [Paraview] Building on Titan using ParaViewSuperbuild
I tried to follow the instructions and the configuration scripts to build
ParaView for compute nodes on Titan. It built successfully without issues for
the TOOLS stage, but when doing final linking for paraview in the CROSS stage,
I got numerous similar linking error from different lines such as the following:
/../ParaView/ParaViewSuperbuild/cross/paraview/src/paraview/Utilities/mpi4py/src/mpi4py.MPI.c:
In function '__pyx_pf_6mpi4py_3MPI_4File_54Sync':
/../ParaView/ParaViewSuperbuild/cross/paraview/src/paraview/Utilities/mpi4py/src/mpi4py.MPI.c:89682:7:
error: '_save' undeclared (first use in this function)
The same error message were raised from the same file mpi4py.MPI.c from
different lines.
I am using CMake version 2.8.10.2 which is provided by Titan, and using the
ParaView source tree version 3.98 with one additional filter I have developed.
Any idea on what could cause the linking error?
Thanks,
Hong
From: David E DeMarle [dave.dema...@kitware.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 4:08 PM
To: Vanmoer, Mark W
Cc: Hong Yi; paraview@paraview.orgmailto:paraview@paraview.org
Subject: Re: [Paraview] Building on Titan using ParaViewSuperbuild
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 3:51 PM, Vanmoer, Mark W
mvanm...@illinois.edumailto:mvanm...@illinois.edu wrote:
So coprocessing will not be built using the below instructions? I would have
mentioned that, but coprocessing appears to
still be part of a regular, non-cross-compile build, so I figured it was part
of ENABLE_paraview
The coprocessing plugin, which adds things to the GUI to make it easy to record
coprocessing pipeline setups doesn't need to be turned on since that lives in
the client only. (It is like python trace or state recording, but tailored to
recording in-situ setups).
Catalyst (the stripped down version of ParaView server that a simulation code
can link to and use to run those recorded pipelines quickly) is not yet an
option in ParaViewSuperbuild. To cross compile Catalyst a bit more work will be
required. It will follow the same plan as how the ParaView server is compiled,
but I just haven't tried it. When I did cross compile Catalyst last year at
this time I did the same steps that ParaViewSuperbuild's TOOLS and CROSS build
passes did, just by hand.
Also, for the below configcross.sh, do we need to pass in a CMake variable
telling it where the tools build dir is located?
That should be an option that you can easily set, but it isn't sorry.
CMake/CrossCompilationMacros.cmake assumes it can find it one directory up and
over like so:
macro(find_hosttools)
set(PARAVIEW_HOSTTOOLS_DIR
${CMAKE_BINARY_DIR}/../tools/paraview/src/paraview-build/ CACHE PATH
Location of host built paraview compile tools directory)
set(PYTHON_HOST_EXE ${CMAKE_BINARY_DIR}/../tools/install/bin/python CACHE PATH
Location of host built python executable)
set(PYTHON_HOST_LIBDIR ${CMAKE_BINARY_DIR}/../tools/install/lib CACHE PATH
Location of host built python libraries)
set(BOOST_HOST_INCLUDEDIR ${CMAKE_BINARY_DIR}/../tools/install/include CACHE
PATH
Location of host built boost headers)
endmacro()
You could predefine all four of those if you like.
Thanks,
Mark
From: David E DeMarle
[mailto:dave.dema...@kitware.commailto:dave.dema...@kitware.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 1:41 PM
To: Hong Yi
Cc: Vanmoer, Mark W; paraview@paraview.orgmailto:paraview@paraview.org
Subject: Re: [Paraview] Building on Titan using ParaViewSuperbuild
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 2:13 PM, Hong Yi
hon...@renci.orgmailto:hon...@renci.org wrote:
Hi David,
I just started to try superbuild on Titan also. I don't see you set ENABLE_MPI
to be true in your configure script. Could you confirm whether ENABLE_MPI needs
to be set to TRUE in order for ParaView to run on Titan in parallel? Since my
purpose is to link our
The ENABLE_MPI flag at the Superbuild level is unrelated. It has a purpose only
when CROSS_BUILD_STAGE=HOST, that is when making ParaView binary installers for
desktops from Superbuild.
You shouldn't turn it on in the TOOLS or CROSS stages. Instead let the CROSS
stage use the system installed MPI. It does that by turning PARAVIEW_USE_MPI=ON
when it configures the ParaView sub-build. See CMake/crosscompile/xk7_gnu to
see where it does that, and to see the other flags it uses.
simulation code (already built statically with CMake on Titan) to ParaView
CoProcessing libraries (I am using version 3.98.1) for in-situ visualization on
Titan, so in this case, do I have to set ENABLE_paraview to true and do I
Re: [Paraview] Building on Titan using ParaViewSuperbuild
Looking more closely, it seems like ParaViewSuperbuild does build catalyst, at
least the libs are getting built:
vanmoer@titan-ext3:~/builds/superbuild/cross/paraview/src/paraview-build/lib
ls *Catalyst*
libvtkPVCatalystCS-pv4.0.a libvtkPVCatalystPython-pv4.0.a
libvtkPVPythonCatalystPython-pv4.0.a
libvtkPVCatalyst-pv4.0.a libvtkPVPythonCatalyst-pv4.0.a
libvtkPVCatalystPython27D-pv4.0.a libvtkPVPythonCatalystPythonD-pv4.0.a
I was able to compile by hunting down all the headers, but not link.
I tried adding -DPARAVIEW_INSTALL_DEVELOPMENT_FILES:BOOL=TRUE to configcross.sh
but I get
CMake Warning:
Manually-specified variables were not used by the project:
PARAVIEW_INSTALL_DEVELOPMENT_FILES
is this because there's no paraviewsdk.cmake in ParaViewSuperbuild/Projects?
From: David E DeMarle [mailto:dave.dema...@kitware.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 3:08 PM
To: Vanmoer, Mark W
Cc: Hong Yi; paraview@paraview.org
Subject: Re: [Paraview] Building on Titan using ParaViewSuperbuild
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 3:51 PM, Vanmoer, Mark W
mvanm...@illinois.edumailto:mvanm...@illinois.edu wrote:
So coprocessing will not be built using the below instructions? I would have
mentioned that, but coprocessing appears to
still be part of a regular, non-cross-compile build, so I figured it was part
of ENABLE_paraview
The coprocessing plugin, which adds things to the GUI to make it easy to record
coprocessing pipeline setups doesn't need to be turned on since that lives in
the client only. (It is like python trace or state recording, but tailored to
recording in-situ setups).
Catalyst (the stripped down version of ParaView server that a simulation code
can link to and use to run those recorded pipelines quickly) is not yet an
option in ParaViewSuperbuild. To cross compile Catalyst a bit more work will be
required. It will follow the same plan as how the ParaView server is compiled,
but I just haven't tried it. When I did cross compile Catalyst last year at
this time I did the same steps that ParaViewSuperbuild's TOOLS and CROSS build
passes did, just by hand.
Also, for the below configcross.sh, do we need to pass in a CMake variable
telling it where the tools build dir is located?
That should be an option that you can easily set, but it isn't sorry.
CMake/CrossCompilationMacros.cmake assumes it can find it one directory up and
over like so:
macro(find_hosttools)
set(PARAVIEW_HOSTTOOLS_DIR
${CMAKE_BINARY_DIR}/../tools/paraview/src/paraview-build/ CACHE PATH
Location of host built paraview compile tools directory)
set(PYTHON_HOST_EXE ${CMAKE_BINARY_DIR}/../tools/install/bin/python CACHE PATH
Location of host built python executable)
set(PYTHON_HOST_LIBDIR ${CMAKE_BINARY_DIR}/../tools/install/lib CACHE PATH
Location of host built python libraries)
set(BOOST_HOST_INCLUDEDIR ${CMAKE_BINARY_DIR}/../tools/install/include CACHE
PATH
Location of host built boost headers)
endmacro()
You could predefine all four of those if you like.
Thanks,
Mark
From: David E DeMarle
[mailto:dave.dema...@kitware.commailto:dave.dema...@kitware.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 1:41 PM
To: Hong Yi
Cc: Vanmoer, Mark W; paraview@paraview.orgmailto:paraview@paraview.org
Subject: Re: [Paraview] Building on Titan using ParaViewSuperbuild
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 2:13 PM, Hong Yi
hon...@renci.orgmailto:hon...@renci.org wrote:
Hi David,
I just started to try superbuild on Titan also. I don't see you set ENABLE_MPI
to be true in your configure script. Could you confirm whether ENABLE_MPI needs
to be set to TRUE in order for ParaView to run on Titan in parallel? Since my
purpose is to link our
The ENABLE_MPI flag at the Superbuild level is unrelated. It has a purpose only
when CROSS_BUILD_STAGE=HOST, that is when making ParaView binary installers for
desktops from Superbuild.
You shouldn't turn it on in the TOOLS or CROSS stages. Instead let the CROSS
stage use the system installed MPI. It does that by turning PARAVIEW_USE_MPI=ON
when it configures the ParaView sub-build. See CMake/crosscompile/xk7_gnu to
see where it does that, and to see the other flags it uses.
simulation code (already built statically with CMake on Titan) to ParaView
CoProcessing libraries (I am using version 3.98.1) for in-situ visualization on
Titan, so in this case, do I have to set ENABLE_paraview to true and do I need
to enable OSMesa for ParaView to resort to off-screen rendering for in-situ
visualization?
The CROSS stage turns on Python, Mesa and ParaView. Titan's accelerators don't
really run X11, so Mesa is the only option for rendering there.
Although I can build ParaView from source on Titan login nodes, I am not able
to run it on compute nodes, so I am starting to try superbuild hoping to be
able to cross build ParaView libraries to run in-situ visualization on Titan.
I've cross compiled Catalyst itself before on a bluegene. I did it manually
before SuperBuild
Re: [Paraview] Building on Titan using ParaViewSuperbuild
Thanks for the info, Mark. Looks like it is sensible for me to try newer
version of CMake 2.8.11.2 and see how it goes.
On a somewhat related question: I am trying to pass in some CMake flags to make
it build my new filter plugin as well as FortranAdaptor for coprocessing (yes,
I discovered also that coprocessing/catalyst is built by default by superbuild,
but FortranAdaptor is turned off by default). I tried to pass it in by adding
corresponding -D to configuretools, but got CMake warning as well indicating
those manually-specified variables were not used. I am wondering whether I can
do it by directly changing CMakeCache.txt under paraview/src/paraview-build to
force the corresponding flags to be on...
Thanks,
Hong
From: Vanmoer, Mark W [mailto:mvanm...@illinois.edu]
Sent: Friday, August 30, 2013 5:34 PM
To: Hong Yi; David E DeMarle
Cc: paraview@paraview.org
Subject: RE: [Paraview] Building on Titan using ParaViewSuperbuild
Hi Hong,
I was able to get David's instructions to work using CMake 2.8.11.2 and
ParaView 4.0.1. The build process seems to be sensitive to versions.
Mark
From: Hong Yi [mailto:hon...@renci.org]
Sent: Friday, August 30, 2013 3:52 PM
To: David E DeMarle; Vanmoer, Mark W
Cc: paraview@paraview.orgmailto:paraview@paraview.org
Subject: RE: [Paraview] Building on Titan using ParaViewSuperbuild
I tried to follow the instructions and the configuration scripts to build
ParaView for compute nodes on Titan. It built successfully without issues for
the TOOLS stage, but when doing final linking for paraview in the CROSS stage,
I got numerous similar linking error from different lines such as the following:
/../ParaView/ParaViewSuperbuild/cross/paraview/src/paraview/Utilities/mpi4py/src/mpi4py.MPI.c:
In function '__pyx_pf_6mpi4py_3MPI_4File_54Sync':
/../ParaView/ParaViewSuperbuild/cross/paraview/src/paraview/Utilities/mpi4py/src/mpi4py.MPI.c:89682:7:
error: '_save' undeclared (first use in this function)
The same error message were raised from the same file mpi4py.MPI.c from
different lines.
I am using CMake version 2.8.10.2 which is provided by Titan, and using the
ParaView source tree version 3.98 with one additional filter I have developed.
Any idea on what could cause the linking error?
Thanks,
Hong
From: David E DeMarle [dave.dema...@kitware.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 4:08 PM
To: Vanmoer, Mark W
Cc: Hong Yi; paraview@paraview.orgmailto:paraview@paraview.org
Subject: Re: [Paraview] Building on Titan using ParaViewSuperbuild
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 3:51 PM, Vanmoer, Mark W
mvanm...@illinois.edumailto:mvanm...@illinois.edu wrote:
So coprocessing will not be built using the below instructions? I would have
mentioned that, but coprocessing appears to
still be part of a regular, non-cross-compile build, so I figured it was part
of ENABLE_paraview
The coprocessing plugin, which adds things to the GUI to make it easy to record
coprocessing pipeline setups doesn't need to be turned on since that lives in
the client only. (It is like python trace or state recording, but tailored to
recording in-situ setups).
Catalyst (the stripped down version of ParaView server that a simulation code
can link to and use to run those recorded pipelines quickly) is not yet an
option in ParaViewSuperbuild. To cross compile Catalyst a bit more work will be
required. It will follow the same plan as how the ParaView server is compiled,
but I just haven't tried it. When I did cross compile Catalyst last year at
this time I did the same steps that ParaViewSuperbuild's TOOLS and CROSS build
passes did, just by hand.
Also, for the below configcross.sh, do we need to pass in a CMake variable
telling it where the tools build dir is located?
That should be an option that you can easily set, but it isn't sorry.
CMake/CrossCompilationMacros.cmake assumes it can find it one directory up and
over like so:
macro(find_hosttools)
set(PARAVIEW_HOSTTOOLS_DIR
${CMAKE_BINARY_DIR}/../tools/paraview/src/paraview-build/ CACHE PATH
Location of host built paraview compile tools directory)
set(PYTHON_HOST_EXE ${CMAKE_BINARY_DIR}/../tools/install/bin/python CACHE PATH
Location of host built python executable)
set(PYTHON_HOST_LIBDIR ${CMAKE_BINARY_DIR}/../tools/install/lib CACHE PATH
Location of host built python libraries)
set(BOOST_HOST_INCLUDEDIR ${CMAKE_BINARY_DIR}/../tools/install/include CACHE
PATH
Location of host built boost headers)
endmacro()
You could predefine all four of those if you like.
Thanks,
Mark
From: David E DeMarle
[mailto:dave.dema...@kitware.commailto:dave.dema...@kitware.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 1:41 PM
To: Hong Yi
Cc: Vanmoer, Mark W; paraview@paraview.orgmailto:paraview@paraview.org
Subject: Re: [Paraview] Building on Titan using ParaViewSuperbuild
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 2:13 PM, Hong Yi
hon...@renci.orgmailto:hon...@renci.org wrote:
Hi David,
I
[Paraview] viewing Gadget2 simulations
Greetings, all. I am a PhD student in astrophysics at the University of Wisconsin-Madison working on dynamics simulations with Gadget2. To test my setup, I ran the galaxy collision simulation included with the Gadget2 distribution, and generated a sequence of snapshots. I am trying to view these snapshots in Paraview (3.98.0-enhanced 64-bit), but I cannot see the position vector data. The object inspector only shows the ghost, mass, tag, and velocity fields. Using the snapshot extraction codes provided with the Gadget2 distribution, I was able to see that the position data is indeed present in the snapshot files. Has anyone had the problem before? I have searched through the mailing list archives, read through the user's manual, and read over the 2011 ApJ paper, all to no avail. Many thanks for your help in advance. - Tim ___ 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 Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://www.paraview.org/mailman/listinfo/paraview
