Re: amber-developers: Extra Points Calculation

From: Lachele Foley <lfoley.ccrc.uga.edu>
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 13:45:51 -0500

Yep... Even the mdout file agrees:


 Number of triangulated 3-point waters found: 623
| Atom division among processors:
| 0 797 1592 2387 3182

     Sum of charges from parm topology file = 0.00000000
     Forcing neutrality...
| Running AMBER/MPI version on 4 nodes


I'll try running it on 2 nodes now and see if the output looks better.


:-) Lachele
--
B. Lachele Foley, PhD '92,'02
Assistant Research Scientist
Complex Carbohydrate Research Center, UGA
706-542-0263
lfoley.ccrc.uga.edu
----- Original Message -----
From: Ilyas Yildirim
[mailto:yildirim.pas.rochester.edu]
To: amber-developers.scripps.edu
Sent:
Tue, 11 Nov 2008 13:41:50 -0500
Subject: Re: amber-developers: Extra Points
Calculation
> Can you do minimization using 4 CPUs? I could only use 2 CPUs in
> minimization processes.
> 
> On Tue, 11 Nov 2008, Lachele Foley wrote:
> 
> > PS to the previous... the minimization was run on four processors... 
> Sorry for any confusion.
> >
> >
> > :-) Lachele
> > --
> > B. Lachele Foley, PhD '92,'02
> > Assistant Research Scientist
> > Complex Carbohydrate Research Center, UGA
> > 706-542-0263
> > lfoley.ccrc.uga.edu
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Lachele Foley
> > [mailto:lfoley.ccrc.uga.edu]
> > To: amber-developers.scripps.edu
> > Sent: Tue, 11
> > Nov 2008 13:27:09 -0500
> > Subject: Re: amber-developers: Extra Points
> > Calculation
> >
> >
> > > > We thought it does, but Lachele discovered more problems yesterday
> > > > evening; he was going to take a look today.
> > >
> > > I kept having jobs fail...  I could only get them to behave on 2
> processors.
> > >  I hadn't even looked, graphically, at the output.  Silly me.
> > >
> > > The minimization isn't doing quite what I expect.  Load the attached
> > > topology and restart into vmd or something and you will find, if you
> twirl
> > > the system the right way, a lovely rift between two halves of the
> solvent,
> > > with the sucrose molecule spanning the gap, more or less.  The starting
> > > coordinates look like a standard array of water molecules dropped around
> a
> > > solvent, so this is something the minimization is doing.  Also attached
> is
> > > my MIN.in file in case there is some EP-relevant keyword I didn't set
> > > properly.  If I had to make a blind guess, I'd say the two processors
> aren't
> > > talking to each other in quite the way they should -- like half the
> solvent
> > > went to one, and half went to the other, and neither knows exactly where
> the
> > > other is.  Or something.
> > >
> > > And, for what it's worth, The CP running on two processors seems to be
> > > slowly correcting the problem.  It's over 100,000 steps and the
> coordinates
> > > look pretty good now.  At first, it was what you'd expect.  I can send
> some
> > > or all of that output if anyone wants to see it.
> > >
> > > :-) Lachele
> > > --
> > > B. Lachele Foley, PhD '92,'02
> > > Assistant Research Scientist
> > > Complex Carbohydrate Research Center, UGA
> > > 706-542-0263
> > > lfoley.ccrc.uga.edu
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Volodymyr Babin
> > > [mailto:vbabin.ncsu.edu]
> > > To: amber-developers.scripps.edu
> > > Sent: Tue, 11 Nov
> > > 2008 07:20:07 -0500
> > > Subject: Re: amber-developers: Extra Points
> > > Calculation
> > >
> > >
> > > > > Does it solve Lachele's problem (the sucrose_EP test case)?
> > > >
> > > > We thought it does, but Lachele discovered more problems yesterday
> > > > evening; he was going to take a look today.
> > > >
> > > > > As far as I can see, that example does not include any "LP" atoms,
> > > > > and I don't think we should be expanding to that...my recollection
> > > > > was that "LP" atoms (still found in
> > > > > some old parameter/topology files) were *not* treated as extra
> points,
> > > but
> > > > > as real atoms.
> > > >
> > > > I see. Then probably the 'LP  ' part is unneeded indeed. I am not a
> > > > right person to judge here.
> > > >
> > > > > I tried to expand the size of max14 (not as much as you did), and
> was
> > > > > still getting segfaults on Lachele's example.
> > > >
> > > > This is because of too short nb14_list and i14 (their sizes are
> > > proportional
> > > > to the max14, but max14 is not used in the corresponding allocate()).
> > > >
> > > > Volodymyr
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
> 
> -- 
>   Ilyas Yildirim, Ph.D.
>   ---------------------------------------------------------------
>   = Hutchison Hall B#10          - Department of Chemistry      =
>   =                              - University of Rochester      =
>   = 585-275-6766 (office)        -                              =
>   = http://www.pas.rochester.edu/~yildirim/                     =
>   ---------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
Received on Fri Dec 05 2008 - 14:28:38 PST
Custom Search