Thanks for the new “balance” command. It has been very useful so far. I am wondering if I can use it to reach even better optimization for the current structure I am simulating:
Two CNTs form a perpendicular cross-junction, with one resting on top of the other.
The computational cell has dimensions 2L x 2L x 2H
Tube 1 is on the x-axis from x = -L to L, and assume a height of H.
Tube 2 is on the y-axis from y = -L to L, resting on top of Tube 1, and assume a height of 2H.
Due to the largely one-dimensional nature of CNTs (length of tube is much greater than diameter) there is significant empty space in the computation cell, and reaching a reasonable “balance factor” is difficult even with various “balance” command attempts.
The ideal processor configuration would consist of two differing, overlaid grids. The allocation of processors in the x and y directions would change with respect to the z-dimension, to reflect the significant change in physical configuration from Tube 1 at height H, and Tube 2 at height 2H.
Let’s assume I am distributing 1000 processors. An ideal processor allocation would be:
Px, Py, Pz, = 500 x 1 x 1 for z = 0 to H (to cover the “1 dimensional" tube along the x-axis)
Px, Py, Pz, = 1 x 500 x 1 for z = H to 2H (to cover the “1 dimensional” tube along the y-axis)
So I am not sure if this defies the constraints of processor allocation, but I am wondering if some combination of “balance” and other commands can be used to create these two regions of processor allocations, which would greatly reduce the balance factor.
Thanks for your time.