Difference between revisions of "ET Workshop 2015/new developments"
Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
# Managing and reproducing data | # Managing and reproducing data | ||
## postprocessing | ## postprocessing | ||
− | # Performance | + | ## simulation |
− | ## AMR | + | ## simulation management, simfactory |
+ | ##* Ian Hinder describes situation of simfactory2 and work on simfactory3 (Hinder, Wardell, Schnetter). Ian Hawke mentions the possibility of other workflow management systems that exist and have a wide user base. | ||
+ | ##* desire to include management of simulation data | ||
+ | # Performance in optimization and usability | ||
+ | ## AMR, scaling, adaptiveness | ||
+ | ##* reduce focus on home grown solution for GR only | ||
+ | ##* discuss benefits of Chombo and GRChombo. Ian Hawke mentions bad experience | ||
+ | with these frameworks in relativity. | ||
## Usability | ## Usability | ||
##* more examples, better documentation (hypothetical "science with ET", Carpet) | ##* more examples, better documentation (hypothetical "science with ET", Carpet) | ||
Line 36: | Line 43: | ||
##* now there are multiple hydro codes that are public | ##* now there are multiple hydro codes that are public | ||
# ET maintenance | # ET maintenance | ||
− | ## tickets | + | ## tickets (weekly telecon?) |
# computer time for infrastructure development in Europe | # computer time for infrastructure development in Europe | ||
#* PRACE only gives prepartory access to test on the given machine but not to develop | #* PRACE only gives prepartory access to test on the given machine but not to develop | ||
− | #* PRACE ony funds big ones, smaller ones through national agencies | + | #* PRACE ony funds big ones, smaller ones through national agencies. (CINECA |
+ | offers class C allocations for this) |
Revision as of 04:33, 13 August 2015
usability:
- documentation wanted, not just code but also on how to do things
- larger set of gallery examples
- lack of complete documentation. Some part are well documented (Cactus flesh) but newer features are mostly undocumented, for example the tags
- want some high level documentation
- suggestion to also have a correctness checking framework
- non-working examples are included in the toolkit. Example parfiles should be commented to make them easier to understand.
- higher level "Einstein Toolkit" user guide.
- Managing and reproducing data
- postprocessing
- simulation
- simulation management, simfactory
- Ian Hinder describes situation of simfactory2 and work on simfactory3 (Hinder, Wardell, Schnetter). Ian Hawke mentions the possibility of other workflow management systems that exist and have a wide user base.
- desire to include management of simulation data
- Performance in optimization and usability
- AMR, scaling, adaptiveness
- reduce focus on home grown solution for GR only
- discuss benefits of Chombo and GRChombo. Ian Hawke mentions bad experience
- AMR, scaling, adaptiveness
with these frameworks in relativity.
- Usability
- more examples, better documentation (hypothetical "science with ET", Carpet)
- scientific programmers
- Usability
- Code correctness
- Cactus-aware correctness testing framework. Ideally with set of a simulation and analysis tests, may e much more heavyweight than testsuite.
- HPC correctness test
- Updating private codes to agree with ET developments
- Community practises
- backwards compatibility. Strict compatibility hurts usefulness.
- Cactus may have been to conservative mainaining compatibility
- IF things broke we were not good about announcing this or providing useful error messages at runtime
- hard to provide runtime information or code. Need a method to deprecate code and parameters with escalating warnings/errors/aborts as the deprecated feature becomes older.
- Physics modules
- better interfaces, evolution agnostic analysis, metadata
- adopt standards (preferably public ones, or from neighbouring fields)
- initial data: provide more? Better documentation for initial data thorns?
- GRHydro development:
- cleanup
- coordinate
- more standards for hydro
- provide metadata with ID thorns
- agree on exactly on what is provided
- now there are multiple hydro codes that are public
- ET maintenance
- tickets (weekly telecon?)
- computer time for infrastructure development in Europe
- PRACE only gives prepartory access to test on the given machine but not to develop
- PRACE ony funds big ones, smaller ones through national agencies. (CINECA
offers class C allocations for this)