boundaries.
But I guess that in your case molecules will never cross the boundary
and therefore the comm code will work as it should.
Berk
From: x.peri...@rug.nl
To: gmx-users@gromacs.org
Subject: Re: [gmx-users] angular removal of COM and domain
decomposition
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 18:58:24 +0100
-users@gromacs.org
Subject: Re: [gmx-users] angular removal of COM and domain decomposition
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 18:58:24 +0100
> 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
> 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.
Yes, sorry!
By imposed I mean that the flags are explicitly changed to do angular
removal of
COM (remove
> 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
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
is not
implemented and suggests to use particle decomposition, which is
unfortunately
much much slower.
What would happen if the use
5 matches
Mail list logo
