Dear Utkarsh,
thank you for these explanations. If you feel like I "keep asking time
consuming questions over and over again without contributing back to the
community much", it is, because I'll need a long time to get to a point
where I can help others. Maybe never. Depends on the help I get :(
I
> If collaboration is experimental in ParaView, I'd say so in the very
> beginning of any article documenting or blogging about those functions.
> Still, in an experimental feature, there should be suffiecient interest to
> fix bugs, or "unsupported" would be a better term.
Makes sense. Note th
Dear Utkarsh,
yes, for the time being, I am trying to base my project only on VTK, which
means reinventing lots of ParaView's architecture. At least, I get
*something* running, although progress is slow. But my hope is to switch
back to ParaView once I understand it better and when some bugs are fi
Probably not, but then I assumed you had moved on. Are you still doing
this? Can you go back to your original use-case? What is your objective
with this? Maybe there are alternative approaches than using the
"collaboration" support, which frankly is rarely used and hence I'd
consider experimental.
Dear Utkarsh,
is there any chance that this issue is looked at during the upcoming
hackathon?
Peter
2016-06-28 17:46 GMT+02:00 Peter Debuchev :
> Dear Utkarsh,
> I tried to reproduce the error as described in my previous email, but
> haven't been able to until now, don't know what happend. The a
Dear Utkarsh,
I tried to reproduce the error as described in my previous email, but
haven't been able to until now, don't know what happend. The attached code
attaches to a pvserver at localhost:1 and adds a sphere every half
second. Unfortunately it crashes as soon as I connect ParaView to the
Thank you for the patch. There is still something missing. If I modify the
custom client such that it adds an object every half second or so, then
first start this clients and then ParaView after a few seconds, ParaView
misses one of the objects. ParaView finds those objects that are added
before P
> can you give a quick update whether the suggested bug fix is likely to be
> solved:
Here you go: https://gitlab.kitware.com/paraview/paraview/merge_requests/844
Once the dashboards come back clean, this will get merged. If do get
around to testing it, I'd suggest getting involved and giving the
Dear Utkarsh,
can you give a quick update whether the suggested bug fix is likely to be
solved:
> Proxies are being created before the session was "ready for use". Like
> I said, collaboration isn't being used actively in production so such
> issues are expected. Since I don't have active projects
Well, I see that I'll need some more debug sessions to get this solved.
>Why not make M aware of the code that needs to be executed and then
>just trigger those through higher level messages from S? This is like
>your first option, but you're only sending coarse messages eg. "Do
>Action1" etc to M
Peter,
> Or does additional
> documentation (design documents, message exchange protocols, ...) exist?
Sorry my friend. Nothing more than what I previously mentioned on the
mailing list.
http://www.paraview.org/ParaView/images/2/24/ParaViewCollaborationChanges.pdf
http://www.paraview.org/ParaVi
Dear Utkarsh,
to have some basis for this discussion, I'd like to mention that my
knowledge on the collaboration functionality is limited to what is shown in
http://vimeo.com/34480656 and to the class reference
http://www.paraview.org/ParaView/Doc/Nightly/www/cxx-doc/classvtkSMCollaborationManager.
Peter,
ParaView already supports changing the master. A "master" can make any
other connected process the new master. Once that happens the new
master can start changing pipelines etc.
> Finally, I believe that I will have to dive into message passing between
> paraview clients, soon.
Try runnin
Dear Utkarsh,
thank you for these very clear explanations and for offering to fix the
issue with loading the initial collaboration state. Although I had
understood that data sources can only be created by the master, it wasn't
obvious to me that the same holds for views. I think I have a better
und
Peter,
In ParaView's collaboration support there's the notion of a master and
everyone else. The first client that connects to the pvserver is the
"master" by default. The master is the only one that should create new
proxies. This doesn't preclude the other clients from not creating new
proxies,
Hello again,
I have a follow-up question concerning my attempts to create a
collaborative standalone client. The attached example connects to a
pvserver running on localhost (with --multi-clients option) and creates a
SphereSource together with its representation. Depending on whether
"USEVIEW" is
16 matches
Mail list logo
