On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 12:42 PM, Sam Skillman <samskillman@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Britton,

Would you mind pasting your script and mpirun command line? Processor 0 should be the only processor that has the entire image at the end. If anything processor 1 would have half an image, which is why this confuses me.

Thanks,
Sam

On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 10:07 AM, Britton Smith <brittonsmith@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi again,

Just an update on this. I was incorrect when I stated that the image arrays were all zeros in parallel. What actually seems to be the case is that with two processors, processor 0 which does the image writing, only has a fraction of the total image, which to me looked like all zeros. Processor 1 seems to have the entire image, though. It has the same number of non-zero cells as the image array does in serial mode.

I still don't know what's happening, but I'm looking at it.

Britton

On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Britton Smith <brittonsmith@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi,

I'm doing a pretty simple volume render that uses the Camera.snapshot function. In serial, everything seems to be working fine, but when I run in parallel, the image comes out completely blank. I have gone into the snapshot routine and verified that the image array is all zeros for every processor after the loop:
for brick in self.volume.traverse(self.back_center, self.front_center, image):

This is in the tip of the development version of yt.

Does anyone know what the issue is here?

Thanks,
Britton

_______________________________________________
yt-users mailing list
yt-users@lists.spacepope.org
http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-users-spacepope.org

_______________________________________________
yt-users mailing list
yt-users@lists.spacepope.org
http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-users-spacepope.org