[Paraview] holes in distributed polydata

burlen burlen.loring at gmail.com
Thu Jan 14 12:04:35 EST 2010


Ken,

Here is a dataset that I am able to reproduce with:
http://nashi-submaster.ucsd.edu/movies/PV/holes.tar.gz

run with 96 procs. Set the view to +y. If the long holes aren't 
appearing in your view I found that smaller holes can show up by 
rotating the plane in small increments about either the x or z axis. 
These ones are pretty small so you have to look closely.

Burlen

Moreland, Kenneth wrote:
> Burlen,
>
> Is there any possible way you can send me some data or replicate the 
> problem with something like the Mandelbrot source? So far I have not 
> been able to replicate it exactly.
>
> -Ken
>
>
> On 1/5/10 2:34 PM, "burlen" <burlen.loring at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>     Ken,
>     Some bad news, this patch didn't solve the problem, the holes returned
>     on my first run.
>     Burlen
>
>
>     Moreland, Kenneth wrote:
>     > That was not intended to be a solution, but rather a diagnostic. My
>     > guess is that there are precision errors in the rasterization
>     when the
>     > viewport is shifted. Could you restore vtkIceTRenderManager and try
>     > the attached patch to IceT?
>     >
>     > -Ken
>     >
>     >
>     > On 12/10/09 12:26 PM, "burlen" <burlen.loring at gmail.com> wrote:
>     >
>     > Hi Ken,
>     >
>     > it seems to have solved the problems. I say that with fingers
>     > crossed, I
>     > haven't seen holes any since your suggested changes, where before
>     > I was
>     > seeing them quite often, popping up from time to time.
>     >
>     > Burlen
>     >
>     > Moreland, Kenneth wrote:
>     > > Hmm. It is possible that the “floating viewport” feature of IceT
>     > could
>     > > be causing troubles with precision. Could you try adding
>     > >
>     > > icetDisable(ICET_FLOATING_VIEWPORT);
>     > >
>     > >
>     > > somewhere in the vtkIceTRenderManager::UpdateIceTContext()
>     method and
>     > > see if the problem goes away?
>     > >
>     > > -Ken
>     > >
>     > >
>     > > On 12/7/09 10:11 AM, "burlen" <burlen.loring at gmail.com> wrote:
>     > >
>     > > Hi Ken,
>     > > For that figure you mention I turned on "surface with edges" to
>     > > show the
>     > > cell size better. Sorry I can see how that could be confusing. But
>     > > just
>     > > to clarify, there aren't actually any holes in the surface.
>     > >
>     > > Here is another zoom in of the same area where "surface with
>     > edges" is
>     > > off and you can see that there are no holes.
>     > > http://nashi-submaster.ucsd.edu/movies/PV/bug-zoom.png
>     > >
>     > > Now I also have hit a case where after running through D3 I got a
>     > hole
>     > > at the process boundary. this run had 80 processes, the surface
>     shown
>     > > has dimensions of 5.5 x 10 units with 1500 x 2727quads with side
>     > > 0.0036
>     > > units.
>     > > http://nashi-submaster.ucsd.edu/movies/PV/bug-d3.png
>     > >
>     > > I am only seeing this with the small quads and in parallel at
>     process
>     > > boundaries.
>     > >
>     > > Burlen
>     > >
>     > >
>     > > Moreland, Kenneth wrote:
>     > > > Burlen,
>     > > >
>     > > > For the zoom in, you say there are no holes/lines, but in the
>     > image I
>     > > > see a grid of lines. It looks like you have a bunch of little
>     quads
>     > > > with spacing in between them. Is this the case? If so, then the
>     > > “hole”
>     > > > artifacts you see on the bottom of the screen are probably simply
>     > > > aliasing artifacts. They are places where the pixel happens to
>     > align
>     > > > right where the gap is.
>     > > >
>     > > > I can’t think of an easy way around this (other than to
>     modify your
>     > > > data to remove the gaps, if that makes sense). Anti-aliasing
>     > > > techniques such as oversampling or smoothing would probably
>     fix the
>     > > > problem, but they would also break the parallel rendering so
>     > they are
>     > > > no good.
>     > > >
>     > > > -Ken
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > > On 12/5/09 12:18 AM, "burlen" <burlen.loring at gmail.com> wrote:
>     > > >
>     > > > its ugly but I get a lot better performance by splitting the
>     > work up
>     > > > dynamically with a small grain size. in the run shown below
>     > there are
>     > > > only 16 processes but there are a whole lot of process
>     boundaries.
>     > > >
>     > > > I was able to reproduce it on a second system today.
>     > > >
>     > > > these holes are pretty non-deterministic in where they show up.
>     > > moving
>     > > > the camera they can show up in different places. Which makes
>     > sense if
>     > > > this is related to some parallel rendering/finite precision issue
>     > > with
>     > > > all those process boundaries. The small size of the quads are
>     > also a
>     > > > factor, because I didn't ever notice it before when using larger
>     > > > quads.
>     > > >
>     > > > I saved the data as a legacy file and opening it on my desktop
>     > > > there are
>     > > > no issues, so its definitely a parallel only issue. Also running
>     > > > through
>     > > > D3 seems to fix it, but the issue may still be there because
>     > with the
>     > > > minimal number of process boundaries its much less likely to
>     > get the
>     > > > camera in just the right position.
>     > > >
>     > > > Berk Geveci wrote:
>     > > > > Ouch. That's very distributed :-) Does the problem go away
>     > when you
>     > > > > decrease the number of partitions?
>     > > > >
>     > > > > On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 10:55 AM, burlen
>     <burlen.loring at gmail.com>
>     > > > wrote:
>     > > > >
>     > > > >> I'm seeing lines where the background shows through a surface
>     > > > polydata of
>     > > > >> quads. When I zoom into the region to investigate the
>     holes are
>     > > > gone. Moving
>     > > > >> the image around the holes appear in different places. They
>     > > > depend on camera
>     > > > >> position. In this surface there are 2.5E6 quads. the area is
>     > > > 10x16 units and
>     > > > >> the number of quads is 1250x2000. each quad has 0.008
>     units on a
>     > > > side. I
>     > > > >> hadn't seen the holes before going to this higher resolution.
>     > > > It's likely
>     > > > >> that the hole is near a process boundary, in my polydata
>     filter
>     > > > each process
>     > > > >> adds his quads to his output polydata, in this run the
>     quads are
>     > > > distributed
>     > > > >> in strips of 512 as needed.
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >> 3 holes/lines in bottom half of the image (black background
>     > > > shows through):
>     > > > >> http://nashi-submaster.ucsd.edu/movies/PV/bug.png
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >> zoom in no holes/lines:
>     > > > >> http://nashi-submaster.ucsd.edu/movies/PV/bug-zoom-2.png
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >> process boundaries (from process id filter):
>     > > > >> http://nashi-submaster.ucsd.edu/movies/PV/bug-procs.png
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >> Should PV be able to handle a polydata distributed like this?
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >> _______________________________________________
>     > > > >> Powered by www.kitware.com
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >> Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
>     > > > >> http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >> Please keep messages on-topic and check the ParaView Wiki at:
>     > > > >> http://paraview.org/Wiki/ParaView
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >> Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
>     > > > >> http://www.paraview.org/mailman/listinfo/paraview
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >>
>     > > >
>     > > > _______________________________________________
>     > > > Powered by www.kitware.com
>     > > >
>     > > > Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
>     > > > http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html
>     > > >
>     > > > Please keep messages on-topic and check the ParaView Wiki at:
>     > > > http://paraview.org/Wiki/ParaView
>     > > >
>     > > > Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
>     > > > http://www.paraview.org/mailman/listinfo/paraview
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > > **** Kenneth Moreland
>     > > > *** Sandia National Laboratories
>     > > > ***********
>     > > > *** *** *** email: kmorel at sandia.gov
>     > > > ** *** ** phone: (505) 844-8919
>     > > > *** web: http://www.cs.unm.edu/~kmorel
>     <http://www.cs.unm.edu/%7Ekmorel>
>     > <http://www.cs.unm.edu/%7Ekmorel>
>     > > <http://www.cs.unm.edu/%7Ekmorel> <http://www.cs.unm.edu/%7Ekmorel>
>     > > >
>     > >
>     > >
>     > >
>     > >
>     > >
>     > > **** Kenneth Moreland
>     > > *** Sandia National Laboratories
>     > > ***********
>     > > *** *** *** email: kmorel at sandia.gov
>     > > ** *** ** phone: (505) 844-8919
>     > > *** web: http://www.cs.unm.edu/~kmorel
>     <http://www.cs.unm.edu/%7Ekmorel>
>     > <http://www.cs.unm.edu/%7Ekmorel> <http://www.cs.unm.edu/%7Ekmorel>
>     > >
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     > **** Kenneth Moreland
>     > *** Sandia National Laboratories
>     > ***********
>     > *** *** *** email: kmorel at sandia.gov
>     > ** *** ** phone: (505) 844-8919
>     > *** web: http://www.cs.unm.edu/~kmorel
>     <http://www.cs.unm.edu/%7Ekmorel> <http://www.cs.unm.edu/%7Ekmorel>
>     >
>
>
>
>
> **** Kenneth Moreland
> *** Sandia National Laboratories
> ***********
> *** *** *** email: kmorel at sandia.gov
> ** *** ** phone: (505) 844-8919
> *** web: http://www.cs.unm.edu/~kmorel <http://www.cs.unm.edu/%7Ekmorel>
>



More information about the ParaView mailing list