[gmx-developers] Nr of graph edges per atom and distance restraints
hessb at mpip-mainz.mpg.de
Mon Mar 19 11:16:29 CET 2007
David van der Spoel wrote:
> hessb at mpip-mainz.mpg.de wrote:
>>> Juergen Haas wrote:
>>>>> To get things right,
>>>>> you are using only distance restraints, no orientation restraints
>>>>> and you get a segfault around line 166 or orires.c, not disre.c ??
>>>> in that case I forgot to switch off orires...:(
>>>> to wrap it up: the segfault seems to have been linked to fftw commands
>>>> and it
>>>> turned out that I overlooked a trivial error: the lam/fftw environment
>>>> on my
>>>> newly installed machine was broken.
>>>> Fixing that solved all problems and I could use the suggested hack of
>>>> increasing g->maxedge.
>>> To finally fix the bugzilla 66, which number of did you use instead
>>> of 4
>>> on line 229 of mshift.c?
>> This is not relevant.
>> The code is quite small and puts only the chemical bonds in the graph
>> for interactions within three bonds.
>> But one can define as many long-range distance restraints as one likes.
>> Therefore there is not limit to the number of graph edges.
>>> Alternatively, the condition & IF_CHEMBOND on line 201 could be
>>> by & IF_BOND
>> This does not help.
> I think it will because then distance restraints are included, now
> only true chemical bonds are, and then the number will be determined
But we don't want that as a general solution,
since that could cost a lot of extra allocation and might hurt cache
A solution for distance restraints would be to add tp==F_DISRES.
But there was recently also someone with too mant harmonic bonds...
So we should think of a robust solution.
I just looked into the code and since there is g->nedge,
we could first just count everything, then fill the graph as is done now,
then shrink the array while resetting the g->edge pointers
More information about the gromacs.org_gmx-developers