verify for structured options for adjsets

[nselliott]

No description provided.

[cyrush]

@nselliott we are getting close on this one - I exported this to VisIt and noticed gaps between the domains:

Maybe a simple indexing fix is needed?

[gzagaris]

I've seen this before.

Perhaps, it is related to node-based partitioning vs. cell-based partitioning. Some codes may partition nodes (instead of cells) to different domains. Thereby, there exists a cell that spans two different domains, which, creates those gaps when visualized.

[cyrush]

@gzagaris yes, I have seen things like this before as well.

this is an example mesh, i think this is just a simple index issue. Right now the set of domains aren't presenting topology covering those gaps.

[nselliott]

@cyrush That should be fixed now--I had the wrong size for the uniform coordsets.

[coveralls]

Coverage increased (+0.2%) to 86.07% when pulling 708d865 on nselliott:master into db0a528 on LLNL:master.

[nselliott]

@cyrush This PR is updated to include refinement ratios in structured adjsets, to identify differing resolutions between neighboring domains.

[cyrush]

@nselliott took this for a spin, looks good to me.
I am going to merge and add some code to save the example in a follow on PR.