I think this thread got dropped when I was on travel (two months ago and
I'm just now getting back to it, eek!). Matt, could you please comment
on this model?
Jed Brown via petsc-dev writes:
> Matthew Knepley writes:
>
>> The local points could be distinct for
>> both fields and coor
Matthew Knepley writes:
>>> >> The local points could be distinct for
>>> >> both fields and coordinates, with the global SF de-duplicating the
>>> >> periodic points for fields, versus leaving them distinct for
>>> >> coordinates.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Oh, no I would never do that.
>>>
>>> Can you h
Matthew Knepley writes:
> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 11:46 AM Jed Brown wrote:
>
>> Matthew Knepley writes:
>>
>> > On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 7:35 PM Stefano Zampini <
>> stefano.zamp...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Aug 14, 2019, at 1:19 AM, Jed Brown via petsc-dev <
>> >> petsc-
Jed Brown via petsc-dev writes:
> Matthew Knepley writes:
>
>> On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 7:35 PM Stefano Zampini
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Aug 14, 2019, at 1:19 AM, Jed Brown via petsc-dev <
>>> petsc-dev@mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
>>>
>>> [Cc: petsc-dev]
>>>
>>> Also, why is our current mode of local
Matthew Knepley writes:
> On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 7:35 PM Stefano Zampini
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Aug 14, 2019, at 1:19 AM, Jed Brown via petsc-dev <
>> petsc-dev@mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
>>
>> [Cc: petsc-dev]
>>
>> Also, why is our current mode of localized coordinates preferred over
>> the coordinat
[Cc: petsc-dev]
Also, why is our current mode of localized coordinates preferred over
the coordinate DM being non-periodic? Is the intent to preserve that
for every point in a DM, the point is also valid in the coordinate DM?
Can there be "gaps" in a chart?
I've been digging around in the implem
