Re: amber-developers: Pmemd vs sander

From: David A. Case <case.scripps.edu>
Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 15:59:56 -0700

On Sun, Nov 16, 2003, Yong Duan wrote:
>
> Although the first step energies of sander and pmemd agree to the last
> digit, after a while (within 10ps) the energies of the two may start to
> show difference withi a notable change in the energies by pmemd. The
> pmemd energies stabilize at a new level which is not too different from
> the one by sander, but nevertheless noticeable (about the level of
> fluctuation). Has anybody else noticed it?

Just make sure that this is not something simple, like not have the
correct
value for amber7_compat set in the pmemd run. And, what is the difference
in the mean energies? Is there constant temperature or constant pressure
turned on?

>
> Secondly, for some reason, I keep getting "FLUSH--FAILED:: Resource
> temporarily unavailable" from sander on Xeon/mpich/ifc/static
> combination.
>

We get this too, but I don't know where it is coming from. We will
probably
have to special-case how the mdinfo file is handled for this architecture.

.dac

-- 
==================================================================
David A. Case                     |  e-mail:      case.scripps.edu
Dept. of Molecular Biology, TPC15 |  fax:          +1-858-784-8896
The Scripps Research Institute    |  phone:        +1-858-784-9768
10550 N. Torrey Pines Rd.         |  home page:                   
La Jolla CA 92037  USA            |    http://www.scripps.edu/case
==================================================================
Received on Wed Apr 05 2006 - 23:50:06 PDT
Custom Search