Re: [Paramesh-users] PARAMESH version 4.0 now available

[Sergey P. <se...@fr...>]

Dear Kevin,

I have tested new version of PARAMESH and here are my comments:

1. File amr_block_geometry.F90 is broken. This is not what we have done and=
 I=20
correct it again. I kindly ask you to be more careful with that.

2. To use advance_all_levels and curvilinear geometry, line 243 of file=20
mpi_morton_bnd_restrict.F90 must be as following (as its written in=20
mpi_morton_bnd_prolong1.F90)

>>> if(nodetype(lb) =3D=3D 2 .or. advance_all_levels) then <<<

3. From you message
"... If you are using curvilinear coordinates and you also=20
set 'curvilinear_conserve' to true, the code will automatically switch to=20
using direct injection during prolongation of data from course to fine=20
blocks ..."

I have not found that. Where it is? In any case, I kindly ask you to set-up=
 it=20
during initialization only. For example, I use my own 2nd order conservativ=
e=20
prolongation for cylindrical geometry and I prefer to have a simple interfa=
ce=20
when I just set interp_mask_unk to 20.

4. The most hard point is the computational speed. I have compared versions=
=20
4.0 and 3.4 at the same conditions (the same Intel Xenon computer with=20
identical options for Intel fortran compiler). My test case (about 1-2 hour=
s)=20
consists of Poisson and transport solvers mainly and the last version 4.0 i=
s=20
always SLOWER by factor 1.3-1.5 for both single node and parallel=20
computations! Do you have any ideas on the matter?

Best wishes,

Sergey Pancheshnyi

=2D-=20
Dr Sergey Pancheshnyi
Associate Researcher CNRS
Laboratoire Plasma et Conversion d=E2=80=99Energie
Tel. +33 (0)5 61 55 60 54
=46ax. +33 (0)5 61 55 63 32
Web: http://www.laplace.univ-tlse.fr

******* PLEASE NOTE CHANGE OF E-MAIL ADDRESS *******
new address: ser...@la...