You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
IMO it is not a problem and very useful but with the restriction that a particle described by numParticles100 and numParticlesOffset can only exist in one patch even if two patches overlap in their spatial description.
Can we clarify this in the standard?
I came up with this during the refactoring of the particle IO in PIConGPU where I like to introduce some kind of load balancing. To be more flexible I would like to linearize my domain to have more possibilities and simpler solutions for the domain decomposition.
If I linearize my domain I will end up with multiple patches overlapping in there spatial description but where each particle is guaranteed to be linked only from one patch.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Patches of particles must be hyperrectangles [...]. The union of all particle patches must correspond to the complete particle's records.
That does not mean it has to be unique, so we are good here. You can do that and it fulfills the standard in openPMD 1.X :) There is also no plan to restrict this in 2.X.
I am voting for an update of the standard where it is explicitly mentioned that particle patches can be overlapping.
optionally. I am voting for restricting the standard and allowing that each particle can only be part of one patch. If multiple patches can link a particle then it is tough to detect particles linked from more than one patch. This is not a problem if particle patches are not overlapping.
OpenPMD is defining particle patches https://github.com/openPMD/openPMD-standard/blob/1e1d1fe9fd5914628898ab36fb516c4cfc27eeca/STANDARD.md#sub-group-for-each-particle-species to speedup visualization/checkpointing and other operations.
Particle patches are a spatial region description with a link, defined by numParticles and numParticlesOffset to the large particle data array.
The standard is not defining if it is allowed that the description of a patch (offset and extent) must be unique or if it is allowed that patch description to overlap.
example:
IMO it is not a problem and very useful but with the restriction that a particle described by
numParticles100
andnumParticlesOffset
can only exist in one patch even if two patches overlap in their spatial description.Can we clarify this in the standard?
I came up with this during the refactoring of the particle IO in PIConGPU where I like to introduce some kind of load balancing. To be more flexible I would like to linearize my domain to have more possibilities and simpler solutions for the domain decomposition.
If I linearize my domain I will end up with multiple patches overlapping in there spatial description but where each particle is guaranteed to be linked only from one patch.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: