Fix particle patches flush api #1626
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Maybe the old logic made sense at some point, I don't recognize any sense in it now. Specifically, it now leads to trouble in span-based write access, so remove it.
franzpoeschel
force-pushed
the
fix-particle-patches-flush-api
branch
from
eaae4b1
to
72d09b6
Compare
franzpoeschel
added a commit
to franzpoeschel/openPMD-api
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 25, 2024
Accidentally deleted as part of openPMD#1626
franzpoeschel
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 25, 2024
Accidentally deleted as part of #1626
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I don't understand our current particle patches flushing logic and it has led to surprising situations in the past often enough. For some reason, we initialize "numParticles" and "numParticlesOffset" (but not "offset" and "extent"???) upon creation of
ParticleSpecies, but then flush the patches only if there are 3 or more records in the patches (since with numParticles and numParticlesOffset there are 2 already).....Since #1594, we have all regular
storeChunk()API calls inPatchRecordComponent, including the Span API which breaks under this logic, since it requires flushing the structure to the backend immediately internally and cannot handle being skipped by this item count.Additionally, as a further follow-up to #1594 this erases special patch handling from
openpmd-pipesince we can now just use the regular API calls.