[Opm] Tentative Schedule for OPM 2024.10 Release

into the 2024.10 release. Best Regards, Bård Skaflestad SINTEF Digital, Mathematics & Cybernetics Applied Computational Science group Release Manager for OPM 2024.10 Release. ___ Opm mailing list -- opm@opm-project.org To unsubscribe send an emai

[Opm] Re: help - Problem with Phyton script for X-Y plots

hem into software such as OpenOffice Calc or Microsoft Excel for plotting purposes. Best Regards, Bård Skaflestad OPM Developer From: Patricia Carreras Sent: 17 July 2024 03:06 To: opm@opm-project.org ; opm-requ...@opm-project.org Cc: emmanuelndipoj...@gmail

[Opm] Re: Jenkins is back

Thanks a lot for your hard work in upgrading the CI system and keeping this essential service running! It is greatly appreciated. Bård From: Arne Morten Kvarving Sent: 03 July 2024 11:01 To: Opm@opm-project.org Subject: [Opm] Jenkins is back After a day of B

Re: [Opm] Dropping DUNE 2.6 support for OPM 2022.10?

h, at the time of writing, is 20.04 LTS (Dune 2.6) and 22.04 LTS (Dune 2.8). In my opinion it is bringing more recent versions of Dune into the mix that will create an undue maintenance burden. Best Regards, Bård Skaflestad SINTEF Digital, Mathematics & Cybernetics Computational Geoscien

[Opm] OPM 2020.10 Release Available

M/opm-simulators/issues/2889). Best Regards, Bård Skaflestad SINTEF Digital, Mathematics & Cybernetics, Computational Geosciences group Release Manager OPM 2020.10 Release Release Notes for OPM 2020.10 Release Since the OPM 2020.04 release in May 2020 we have worked on many aspec

[Opm] Binary Packages for OPM 2020.10 Release Candidate 5 Available

g" package repositories to your package sources and update the packages using 'apt'. Specifically, the following commands will bring in the new package references sudo add-apt-repository ppa:opm/testing sudo apt-get update Please report any issues you see to the mailing li

[Opm] Binary Packages for OPM 2020.10 Release Candidate 4 Available

rent goal is to make the final release tags on Thursday 5th November, around noon CET, and then the final packages will be available within 24 hours of those tags being created. Best Regards, Bård Skaflestad ___ Opm mailing list Opm@opm-project.o

[Opm] Binary Packages for OPM 2020.10 Release Candidate 2 Available

ity testing. Barring any late-minute issues discovered during testing however we don't anticipate any additional release candidates before the final release. Best Regards, Bård Skaflestad SINTEF Digital, Mathematics & Cybernetics Computational Geosciences group Relea

[Opm] Binary Packages for OPM 2020.10 Release Candidate 1 Available

epository ppa:opm/testing sudo apt-get update Please report any issues you see to the mailing list. Best Regards, Bård Skaflestad SINTEF Digital, Mathematics & Cybernetics Computational Geosciences group Release Manager for OPM 2020.10 Release ___

[Opm] OPM 2020.10 Release Branches Created

, and as previously advertised, no new features merged into the "master" branches from now on will be part of the 2020.10 release. We will post a new message once binary packages of the first release candidate are available. Best Regards, Bård Skaflestad Release Manager, OPM 2020.

[Opm] OPM 2020.10 Release Schedule

Additional testing and bugfixing if needed * Final release Thursday 29th of October To the developers: Please prepare any in-progress work that is scheduled for the 2020.10 release to be in a mergeable state by the feature freeze deadline. Sincerely, Bård Skaflestad SINTEF Digital, M

Re: [Opm] Visualize relative permeabilities in ResInsight

t of Range This is a bug in OPM Flow and we're tracking it in OPM-Common Issue 694 (https://github.com/OPM/opm-common/issues/694). Best Regards, Bård Skaflestad SINTEF Digital, Mathematics & Cybernetics Computational Geosciences group -Original Message- From: Opm On Behalf

Re: [Opm] OPM Query - From a New User

el, then by all means feel free to send it to me by e-mail. By the way, are you running a release version of Flow (e.g., 2020.04) or did you compile the master sources from GitHub yourself? Best Regards, Bård Skaflestad SINTEF Digital, Mathematics & Cybernetics Computational Geosciences group

Re: [Opm] OPM Flow multi-node simulations stuck at domain decomposition step

the source file in question to see if that solves--or at least alleviates--the problem? Best Regards, Bård Skaflestad SINTEF Digital, Mathematics & Cybernetics Computational Geosciences group -Original Message- From: Opm On Behalf Of Yogi Pandey Sent: Thursday, March 12,

Re: [Opm] Problem with WELDIMS

those restrictions. In that case you typically don't need the strict WELLDIMS parsing. Off the top of my head I don't recall exactly how to turn it off, but the relevant keys are RUNSPEC_* Joakim Hove is the project's expert on how to tune those parser settings. Regards, Bård Skafl

Re: [Opm] Problem with WELDIMS

e sized according to the maximum group size (number of child wells or child groups). I hope this helps. In the short term we're not going to be able to change this, so I suggest raising the fourth item of WELLDIMS in this model. Regards, Bård Skaflestad SINTEF Digital, Mathemati

Re: [Opm] Dependencies revisited

framework--Google Test might be an alternative--it is going to require some work to rewrite the tests. That said, raising the minimum C++ language version to C++17 will allow us to replace most of our other usage of Boost; notably regular expressions and Boost.Filesystem. Regards, Bård

[Opm] OPM Flow is Now Independent of LibECL

l" in master. Thank you again to Torbjørn Skille and Arne Morten Kvarving for getting us to this point. To reiterate, I recommend a full rebuild of all modules to ensure you have a consistent set of executable files. Best Regards, Bård Skaflestad SINTEF Digital, Mathematics &am

[Opm] Making OPM Flow Independent of LibECL

rt in getting us to this point, and especially to Arne Morten Kvarving for the build system assistance. Best Regards, Bård Skaflestad SINTEF Digital, Mathematics & Cybernetics Computational Geosciences group ___ Opm mailing list Opm@opm-project.o

Re: [Opm] jenkins - reboot

Yay! Thanks a lot Arne Morten. This is really greatly appreciated! Bård -Original Message- From: Opm On Behalf Of Arne Morten Kvarving Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2019 10:16 AM To: opm@opm-project.org Subject: [Opm] jenkins - reboot Hi community, as you probably have noticed, the jenki

Re: [Opm] 2019.04 release plan

I'll echo the sentiments of the others. Herculean efforts people! Regards, Bård -Original Message- From: Opm On Behalf Of Markus Blatt Sent: Wednesday, May 8, 2019 11:18 AM To: Arne Morten Kvarving Cc: opm@opm-project.org Subject: Re: [Opm] 2019.04 release plan Hi, Great! Thanks a

Re: [Opm] jenkins downtime

Just out of curiosity: If there are any builds running at that time, will they be allowed to complete or terminated? Bård From: Opm [opm-boun...@opm-project.org] on behalf of Arne Morten Kvarving [arne.morten.kvarv...@sintef.no] Sent: 27 June 2016 14:59

Re: [Opm] Property Elements Outside valid limits

ue is above some maximum threshold. Sincerely, -- Bård Skaflestad SINTEF ICT, Applied Mathematics From: Opm [opm-boun...@opm-project.org] on behalf of David Ogbe [do...@aust.edu.ng] Sent: 15 June 2016 19:00 To: Atgeirr Rasmussen Cc: Opm@opm-project.org Subject: Re:

Re: [OPM] Supported DUNE versions / libtool libraries

is Dune 2.4 and do we have a reasonable upgrade path to that? Sincerely, -- Bård Skaflestad SINTEF ICT, Applied Mathematics ___ Opm mailing list Opm@opm-project.org http://www.opm-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opm

Re: [OPM] ninja vs cmake

On 09/06/15 01:04, Roland Kaufmann wrote: On 8th June 2015 at 20:29, Bård Skaflestad wrote: module opm-upscaling [...] has explicit bindings to Fortran libraries (notably LAPACK and the BLAS). The last time I checked Ninja did not support Fortran and was not able to define a working

Re: [OPM] ninja vs cmake

checked Ninja did not support Fortran and was not able to define a working build.ninja file for opm-upscaling. I have not tried to combine build trees for modules created from the Ninja generator with trees created from the Makefile generator. Sincerely, -- Bård Skaflestad bard.skafles...@sintef.no

Re: [OPM] Installation sub directories

Thanks a lot for those answers. They mesh more or less perfectly with the gist of my initial assessment. I will think about the implications a bit more before I make any further comments except on one technical comment concerning sibling builds. Sibling build trees do not need to be in a loca

Re: [OPM] Installation sub directories

Complexity in the build system is certainly worth addressing. That said, I don't understand what the ramifications of this change will be so I'll ask some questions to help assess the situation. This will be from the point of view of a developer. Suppose that I'm using and making changes t

Re: [OPM] Installation sub directories

What, specifically, do you mean by "remove sibling build feature"? Will we no longer support having multiple opm-${module} directories checked out in a single directory, do (more or less) active development on all of them and have the build output in a completely separate tree? I don't care i

Re: [OPM] Porsol: IncompFlowSolverHybrid - decrypting the procedure

On 16/03/15 18:43, Jørgen Kvalsvik wrote: On 03/16/2015 06:34 PM, Bård Skaflestad wrote: On 16/03/15 18:28, Jørgen Kvalsvik wrote: On 03/16/2015 05:07 PM, Bård Skaflestad wrote: We currently implement the second approach. The matrix sparsity (connection) structure does not change between

Re: [OPM] Porsol: IncompFlowSolverHybrid - decrypting the procedure

On 16/03/15 16:51, Jørgen Kvalsvik wrote: On 03/16/2015 04:43 PM, Bård Skaflestad wrote: As for the overall construction approach, it basically boils down to which is more expensive: * Having two copies of the matrix in memory and re-forming the (unchanging) sparsity structure on

[OPM] Fwd: Re: Porsol: IncompFlowSolverHybrid - decrypting the procedure

Sorry, I hit "reply" rather than "reply all". Bård Forwarded Message Subject: Re: [OPM] Porsol: IncompFlowSolverHybrid - decrypting the procedure Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 16:43:23 +0100 From: Bård Skaflestad To: Jørgen Kvalsvik On 16/03/15 16:11, Jørge

Re: [OPM] Porsol: IncompFlowSolverHybrid - decrypting the procedure

On 16/03/15 15:51, Jørgen Kvalsvik wrote: On 03/16/2015 02:49 PM, Bård Skaflestad wrote: On 26/01/15 13:00, Jørgen Kvalsvik wrote: In the periodic case, will some indices be encountered twice? I'm not sure I understand the question. All indices may, and typically will, be encoun

Re: [OPM] Porsol: IncompFlowSolverHybrid - decrypting the procedure

there is a better approach, then I'd like to see it. Sincerely, -- Bård Skaflestad SINTEF ICT, Applied Mathematics ___ Opm mailing list Opm@opm-project.org http://www.opm-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opm

Re: [OPM] New repo opm-utilities

On 2014-11-19 17:41, Jørgen Kvalsvik wrote: On 2014-11-19 07:27, Alf Birger Rustad wrote: Hello everybody, I am guilty of creating yet another repository in opm. [...] Honestly, I don't think it's that good an idea to have separate repositories at all [...] Noted. 3. Increased maintenanc

Re: [OPM] Support for more linear solvers: status

On 2014-11-14 16:44, Jørgen Kvalsvik wrote: On 14. nov. 2014 16:33, Bård Skaflestad wrote: As a general rule I usually distrust std::map<> when it comes to handling anything that has to do with computational performance and inner loops. [ Reason elided ] I changed it to std::map as

Re: [OPM] Support for more linear solvers: status

On 2014-11-14 15:33, Jørgen Kvalsvik wrote: I have an update and a few questions regarding my project. For introduction and details, please see http://www.opm-project.org/pipermail/opm/2014-October/000664.html Thanks a lot for the update. I haven't digested the message yet and I don't feel qu

Re: [OPM] FW: Boost.Regex and libstc++ debug mode

On Tue, 2014-07-08 at 11:23 +0200, Andreas Lauser wrote: > Hi, > > On Tuesday 08 July 2014 11:15:04 Bård Skaflestad wrote: > > On Tue, 2014-07-08 at 10:46 +0200, Andreas Lauser wrote: > > > We now get a test failure in opm-parser because of this on Arne's machine, &g

Re: [OPM] FW: Boost.Regex and libstc++ debug mode

On Tue, 2014-07-08 at 10:46 +0200, Andreas Lauser wrote: > > On 2014-07-07 17:14, Bård Skaflestad wrote: > > > Just for the record, std::regex appears to be available on GCC 4.7 > > > too. I don't know how complete that support is, though. > > > >

Re: [OPM] FW: Boost.Regex and libstc++ debug mode

On Mon, 2014-07-07 at 16:33 +0200, Andreas Lauser wrote: > it could be that boost::filesystem as it is used in our code does not > trigger the ABI incompatibility by coincidence... That's certainly possible. I don't know. > > as a work-around for newish (>= GCC 4.9 ?) compilers, we could modif

Re: [OPM] Boost.Regex and libstc++ debug mode

On Mon, 2014-07-07 at 14:21 +, Joakim Hove wrote: > a minor Google exercise turned up this: > https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/5911 Clearly I need to work on my Google-fu. I didn't manage to dig that up. Thanks a lot, anyway. I agree with your assessment and it confirms my initial fe

[OPM] Boost.Regex and libstc++ debug mode

All, Since the introduction of Boost.Regex to support regular keyword matching using regular expressions (opm-parser commit 9258651), I am no longer able to use libstdc++'s "Debug Mode", viz. https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/manual/debug_mode.html to build OPM-related projects. If I

Re: [OPM] semantics of transmissibilty

On Mon, 2014-06-30 at 19:28 +0200, Andreas Lauser wrote: > The TD also says that the cell transmissibility T_j is not necessarily > the logically-Cartesian neighbor and the figure used for illustration > purposes also clearly shows a non- conforming grid... Like I said, fault transmissibilities d

Re: [OPM] semantics of transmissibilty

On Mon, 2014-06-30 at 18:07 +0200, Andreas Lauser wrote: > I'm currently struggling with the semantics of the transmissibilities Let me just start by remarking that when you have an UnstructuredGrid, the transmissibility problem is already solved by the pair of functions tpfa_htrans_compute() and

Re: [OPM] UG grid - ignoring ACTUNUM

There is no such method in class GridManager. However, if you "just" need an UnstructuredGrid that doesn't observe ACTNUM you can accomplish the task manually by extracting the grid information through Method GridManager::createGrdecl(), assign a null pointer to grdecl::actnum and then form t

Re: [OPM] Require Boost:regex

Boost,.Regex is fine by me too. Bård From: Opm [opm-boun...@opm-project.org] on behalf of Alf Birger Rustad [a...@statoil.com] Sent: 28 June 2014 23:55 To: Andreas Lauser Cc: opm@opm-project.org Subject: Re: [OPM] Require Boost:regex I believe Boost is

Re: [OPM] issue with compiling opm-core

y the way, do you build the 'well_example' as part of building opm-core or as an independent executable? Sincerely, -- Bård Skaflestad SINTEF ICT, Applied Mathematics ___ Opm mailing list Opm@opm-project.org http://www.opm-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opm

Re: [OPM] Regarding transmissibility multipliers

On Fri, 2014-06-20 at 11:49 +0200, Andreas Lauser wrote: > [i]f MULTX- is not specified, do the values specified in MULTX also > apply for the negative direction? No, they do not. If MULTX- is not explicitly defined in the input, the format requires that MULTX- be implicitly assigned an all-ones

Re: [OPM] Regarding transmissibility multipliers

On Wed, 2014-06-18 at 10:16 +, Joakim Hove wrote: > > On the other hand, if 'MULTFLT' is used in *EDIT* (or, shudder, > > *SCHEDULE*), then it modifies the trans values directly. > > The SCHEDULE section I think is unrealistic to support initially; Agreed. > as for the EDIT section my unde

Re: [OPM] Regarding transmissibility multipliers

On Tue, 2014-06-17 at 15:16 +, Joakim Hove wrote: > Following the closed PR: https://github.com/OPM/opm-parser/pull/241 I > have tried to read and understand how the MULT([XYZ])-? and > FAULTS/MULTFLT keywords interact. Much appreciated. This is intricate material. > MULTX: This keyword is

Re: [OPM] RHEL5 virtual test machines

Thanks a lot, Roland! I happen to *have* a CentOS 5. installation (at work) so that's (mostly?) compatible with RHEL 5, but this is much appreciated and will make it easier to test OPM when I'm not at my usual work environment. Bård From: Opm [opm-boun.

Re: [OPM] [opm-core] DUNE dependency

) that was devoid of any traces of previous build attempts? Bård From: Júlio Hoffimann [julio.hoffim...@gmail.com] Sent: 05 March 2014 18:59 To: Bård Skaflestad Cc: opm@opm-project.org Subject: Re: [OPM] [opm-core] DUNE dependency Problem solved. Lates

Re: [OPM] [opm-core] DUNE dependency

f the opm-parser repository? As for opm-core without opm-parser, please try opm-core commit 2a2d6264edda655464da3517fd5f25b06717bc6d . Sincerely, -- Bård Skaflestad From: Júlio Hoffimann [julio.hoffim...@gmail.com] Sent: 05 March 2014 16:49 To: Bård Skafl

Re: [OPM] [opm-core] DUNE dependency

Did you clone the opm-parser Git repository (https://github.com/OPM/opm-parser.git) or download the sources through some other means? Sincerely, -- Bård Skaflestad From: Júlio Hoffimann [julio.hoffim...@gmail.com] Sent: 05 March 2014 16:44 To: Bård

Re: [OPM] [opm-core] DUNE dependency

d during configuration. Sincerely, -- Bård Skaflestad From: Júlio Hoffimann [julio.hoffim...@gmail.com] Sent: 05 March 2014 16:24 To: Bård Skaflestad Cc: opm@opm-project.org Subject: Re: [OPM] [opm-core] DUNE dependency What diagnostics, if any, do you

Re: [OPM] [opm-core] DUNE dependency

excess of twenty minutes per module). What diagnostics, if any, do you get from CMake during configuration? Best regards, -- Bård Skaflestad From: Opm [opm-boun...@opm-project.org] on behalf of Júlio Hoffimann [julio.hoffim...@gmail.com] Sent: 05 March 201

Re: [OPM] CpGrid face normals

Correction, the transmissibility calculations naturally *also* become simpler when the Euclidian norms of the normal vectors equal the corresponding interface areas. Bård From: Opm [opm-boun...@opm-project.org] on behalf of Bård Skaflestad

Re: [OPM] CpGrid face normals

On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 03:01:32PM +0100, Andreas Lauser wrote: [snip] The choices in opm-core were made for reasons of convenience. Having normals whose (Euclidian) norm equals the corresponding interface area means that the formulae for (mimetic) inner products become simpler. See function

Re: [OPM] Uing opm-parser with opm-{autdiff, core}/opm-parser-integrate

You need the "opm-parser-integrate" branch of opm-core too. Did you switch to that one? Bård From: Opm [opm-boun...@opm-project.org] on behalf of Markus Blatt [mar...@dr-blatt.de] Sent: 05 February 2014 20:48 To: opm@opm-project.org Subject: [OPM] Uing

Re: [OPM] Use of ERT in Parser?

All, Joakim, Just a brief comment. I think that in the interest of short-term progress it's fine to make the ERT a "REQUIRED" prerequisite for opm-parser (and thus OPM proper). In the long term, we should probably coalesce all ECL support (I/O, object construction &c) to a separate, optional,

Re: [OPM] Ids in dune-cornerpoint grid

Hi Markus, The dune-cornerpoint (CpGrid) grid class does not support entities of codimensions other than 0 or "dim". In principle the grid *could* support codimension 1 entities (these things exist within the grid implementation), but as I said it currently does not. Is there a way of informi

Re: [OPM] Boost versions

On Fri, 2013-11-15 at 16:06 +0100, Alf Birger Rustad wrote: > Fine, then I do not really care about version. Debian stable ships > with version 1.49 these days. If Joakim takes on setting up new boost > installations, then feel free to set 1.49 as minimum version as far as > I am concerned. General

[OPM] Preparation for the 2013.10 release of OPM

issue tracker. Sincerely, -- Bård Skaflestad OPM 2013.10 Release Manager ___ Opm mailing list Opm@opm-project.org http://www.opm-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opm

Re: [OPM] Umfpack runtime dependendy is problematic

On Thu, 2013-10-10 at 20:41 +0200, Roland Kaufmann wrote: > On 2013-10-10 14:04, Bård Skaflestad wrote: > > Unfortunately, I can't find the reference right now > > I think that would be this one: [snip link] Yes, that's the story I remember reading. Thanks for digging

Re: [OPM] Umfpack runtime dependendy is problematic

On Thu, 2013-10-10 at 13:51 +0200, Roland Kaufmann wrote: > On 2013-10-10 13:45, Bård Skaflestad wrote: > > do recall that someone (Markus?) pointed out on that at least on > > supercomputers, the (startup) cost of the dynamic linker resolving > > symbols is considerable. &g

Re: [OPM] Umfpack runtime dependendy is problematic

On Thu, 2013-10-10 at 13:33 +0200, Roland Kaufmann wrote: > On 2013-10-10 13:21, Andreas Lauser wrote: > > Besides avoiding the wrath of corporate IT, it also comes with small > > performance benefits, since (as far as I understood it) dynamic linking > > requires indirect function calls which basi

Re: [OPM] Umfpack runtime dependendy is problematic

On Thu, 2013-10-10 at 13:21 +0200, Andreas Lauser wrote: > On Thursday 10 October 2013 10:31:34 Alf Birger Rustad wrote: > > Generally speaking, I would suggest static linking by default of any > > runtime library dependency not supported by Red Hat. > > I would even go a step further and do stat

Re: [OPM] initial state of three-phase

On Fri, 2013-09-27 at 11:06 +0200, Bård Skaflestad wrote: > Furthermore, I suppose that if you have ECLIPSE, you could use ERT's > binary file reading support, including the Python bindings, to extract > the same initial state information from the ".INIT" file of an ECLIP

Re: [OPM] initial state of three-phase

On Fri, 2013-09-27 at 12:07 +0200, Joakim Hove wrote: > Ehhh – I must understand I did not really understand this; what do you > want a three phase initialization for when the actual simulation is > only two phase?? Sorry for being unclear. I *think* the context of this question is more along th

Re: [OPM] initial state of three-phase

information or comments, please do inform the list. Best Regards, -- Bård Skaflestad ___ Opm mailing list Opm@opm-project.org http://www.opm-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opm

Re: [OPM] compiler warnings

On Thu, 2013-09-26 at 13:50 +0200, Andreas Lauser wrote: > there are a few compiler warnings on GCC 4.8 and CLang 3.3 which I > think should be fixed before the release. Andreas, Thanks for setting up the automatic build service. I'll deal with opm-core, opm-autodiff, dune-cornerpoint, and opm

Re: [OPM] New maintainer: opm-upscale

On Tue, 2013-09-24 at 00:49 +0200, Roland Kaufmann wrote: > If anyone is interested in how I did the CMake rollups, they can read a > write-up at . Brilliant! Thank you so much for that information. I'll take some time this afternoon or tonigh

Re: [OPM] Eclipse parser

On Mon, 2013-08-26 at 16:24 +0200, Joakim Hove wrote: > Dear OPM community, > > > > the parser for the ECLIPSE datafile is coming along quite nicely. > There is certainly more work to do, but we feel it has reached a level > where it is interesting to show the current state of the parser and >

Re: [OPM] Xml / json

I'll second what Andreas said. I much prefer JSON to XML for extensibility (and configuration data for that matter). From: opm-boun...@opm-project.org [opm-boun...@opm-project.org] on behalf of Joakim Hove [jo...@statoil.com] Sent: 10 May 2013 14:31 To: o

Re: [OPM] OPM software suite version 2013.03 released

On Fri, 2013-04-12 at 12:02 +, Atgeirr Rasmussen wrote: > I am happy to announce the release of version 2013.03 of the opm > software suite. \o/ | / \ Bård ___ Opm mailing list Opm@opm-project.org http://www.opm-project.

Re: [OPM] ECLIPSE Parser + ECLIPSE summary results

On Mon, 2013-03-04 at 11:37 +0100, Andreas Lauser wrote: > Am Montag, 4. März 2013, 07:58:34 schrieb Joakim Hove: > > > std::map > > > > > That's not nearly enough. By a long shot. First of all, keywords can be > > repeated, can specify parts of the data in one instance and the rest in > > anoth

Re: [OPM] ECLIPSE Parser + ECLIPSE summary results

On Mon, 2013-03-04 at 12:16 +0100, Andreas Lauser wrote: > Just a suggestion: if you just want array-like access to the file > contents, using the mmap() syscall would be an option that does not > consume (much) main memory. Absolutely. Mmap() being POSIX only may or may not be a problem. Bå

Re: [OPM] ECLIPSE Parser + ECLIPSE summary results

On Sun, 2013-03-03 at 20:35 +0100, Håvard Berland wrote: > Bård Skaflestad: > > I personally think a fixed-size buffer (e.g., one megabyte) which is filled > > through fread() and then > > separately tokenised is a much better choice for the lowest > > level of a deck

Re: [OPM] ECLIPSE Parser + ECLIPSE summary results

On Sat, 2013-03-02 at 15:33 +0100, Andreas Lauser wrote: > IMO the "dumb" part of the parser should just represent this structure > using a convenient C++ API, i.e., the data structure could be > basically a map of stringlists, e.g. > > std::map > That's not nearly enough. By a long shot. Fi