Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Control GeomQueryTool screen output #856

Closed
aprilnovak opened this issue Feb 16, 2023 · 12 comments
Closed

Control GeomQueryTool screen output #856

aprilnovak opened this issue Feb 16, 2023 · 12 comments

Comments

@aprilnovak
Copy link
Contributor

In Cardinal, we are re-generating an OpenMC DAGMC model on-the-fly based on contours in temperature and density. Each time we re-init DAGMC, the following is printed to the screen

Set overlap thickness = 0
Set numerical precision = 0.001
Initializing the GeomQueryTool...
Using faceting tolerance: 0.0001
Building acceleration data structures...
Implicit Complement assumed to be Vacuum

In a given simulation, we might be re-initing DAGMC 15 times, so this repeated screen output can de-sensitize the user to our other screen output that we do want them to pay attention to. Ideally, this screen output could be optionally hidden.

@gonuke
Copy link
Member

gonuke commented Feb 16, 2023

We can introduce a convention of this kind of output and a mechanism for users to influence it. We can pass that through to MOAB for the first two lines.

@pshriwise
Copy link
Member

pshriwise commented Mar 16, 2023

Staring at this a little bit more after our call this morning. @gonuke would it be sufficient to add a verbose flag to the GeomQueryTool and GeomTopoTool classes in MOAB? We could then include a method in DAGMC to set the verbosity the classes it depends upon (as well as the verbosity of the DagMC class itself).

@makeclean
Copy link
Contributor

I thought we had one at some point? maybe I'm mis-remembering?

@pshriwise
Copy link
Member

Not seeing anything of that nature in the source code 😞 Shame on us...

@gonuke
Copy link
Member

gonuke commented Mar 16, 2023

Staring at this a little bit more after our call this morning. @gonuke would it be sufficient to add a verbose flag to the GeomQueryTool and GeomTopoTool classes in MOAB? We could then include a method in DAGMC to set the verbosity the classes it depends upon (as well as the verbosity of the DagMC class itself).

I think that would do it, but is still fairly intrusive. We also would have to act on that flag in DAGMC.

@pshriwise
Copy link
Member

pshriwise commented Mar 16, 2023

Agreed, we'd have to act on that flag in DAGMC. And while some changes will be required in MOAB, there's a separate question of how we want to handle verbosity in the DagMC class. Here are the aforementioned lines annotated with which project they come from:

Output Line Class
"Set overlap thickness = 0" MOAB::GeomQueryTool
"Set numerical precision = 0.001" MOAB::GeomQueryTool
"Initializing the GeomQueryTool..." DagMC
"Using faceting tolerance: 0.0001" DagMC
"Building acceleration data structures..." DagMC
"Implicit Complement assumed to be Vacuum" dagmcMetaData

So, as a first step, I think we can decide how we want to handle the output lines coming from DAGMC.

@pshriwise
Copy link
Member

@gonuke
Copy link
Member

gonuke commented May 1, 2023

I think all the pieces are in place for the next release of MOAB. We will still need to add a line in the DagMC constructor to pass along the verbosity.

@ahnaf-tahmid-chowdhury
Copy link
Member

Are we ready to proceed with the latest MOAB version now that we have fixed the Implicit Complement Position in DAGMC through PR #935?

@gonuke
Copy link
Member

gonuke commented Feb 12, 2024

I think it's worth a PR to see how it all works...

@ahnaf-tahmid-chowdhury
Copy link
Member

MOAB is set to the latest version 5.5.1 now through #940

@gonuke
Copy link
Member

gonuke commented Feb 15, 2024

This should now be resolved

@gonuke gonuke closed this as completed Feb 15, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants