[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ESPResSo-devel] harmonic potential
From: |
Markus Deserno |
Subject: |
Re: [ESPResSo-devel] harmonic potential |
Date: |
Thu, 23 Oct 2008 12:11:23 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20070801) |
Hi Christoph,
> for that reason we should make "no cutoff" the default again and allow
> the user to change it himself for special simulations after reading the
> User Guide.
>
"No cutoff" is what we have now. But now we also have problems with the
parallelization, as Axel pointed out. The possibility of a cutoff was
brought
up in order to have a definitive criterion for the interaction range,
useful if we
want to see how many of the particles of a neighboring processor one needs
to keep track of. How do we solve this original problem in the zero cutoff
case? Or do I mix up something here?
Best,
Markus
--
Dr. Markus Deserno
Associate Professor of Physics ++1-412-268-4401 (office)
Carnegie Mellon University ++1-412-681-0648 (fax)
5000 Forbes Avenue ++1-412-268-8367 (Donna Thomas)
Pittsburgh, PA 15213 address@hidden
- [ESPResSo-devel] harmonic potential, Axel Arnold, 2008/10/21
- Re: [ESPResSo-devel] harmonic potential, Burkhard Duenweg, 2008/10/21
- Re: [ESPResSo-devel] harmonic potential, Axel Arnold, 2008/10/22
- Re: [ESPResSo-devel] harmonic potential, Christoph Junghans, 2008/10/22
- Re: [ESPResSo-devel] harmonic potential, Burkhard Duenweg, 2008/10/22
- Re: [ESPResSo-devel] harmonic potential, Markus Deserno, 2008/10/22
- Re: [ESPResSo-devel] harmonic potential, Burkhard Duenweg, 2008/10/22
- Re: [ESPResSo-devel] harmonic potential, Torsten Stuehn, 2008/10/22
- Re: [ESPResSo-devel] harmonic potential, Markus Deserno, 2008/10/22
- Re: [ESPResSo-devel] harmonic potential, Christoph Junghans, 2008/10/23
- Re: [ESPResSo-devel] harmonic potential,
Markus Deserno <=
- Re: [ESPResSo-devel] harmonic potential, harmanda, 2008/10/24
Re: [ESPResSo-devel] harmonic potential, Torsten Stuehn, 2008/10/22