Thanks Michael. <div>I guess you are right that extra time is due to overlapping the ghost layers. </div><div><br></div><div>If you want more performance, you should use .pvti and .vti instead .pvtr and .vtr to store rectilinear data.</div>
<div><br></div><div>My grid is not necessarily uniform even in one direction. If I remember correctly, *.vti files are only for constant spacing, e.g. dx (or dy or dz) in each direction which should not work in my case. </div>
<div><br></div><div>Thanks</div><div>M<br><div><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 2:22 AM, Michael Scheerer <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:M_Scheerer@web.de">M_Scheerer@web.de</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><br>
<br>
Hi Mohamad,<br>
<div class="im"><br>
> I guess *.pvtr file solved my problem. However, I have noticed combining all my *.vtr files via the *.pvrt file, then plotting a contours, it is slower than just loading it via *.pvd file.<br>
> Thanks for the tip though.<br>
<br>
</div>No wonder, if it is slower. Because it does then successful process ghost overlap. If you want more performance, you should use .pvti and .vti instead .pvtr and .vtr to store rectilinear data.<br>
Because in this case Paraview can internally use the vtkImageData class. Also you have then full volume rendering support, which isn't available in the case of .vtr<br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
Michael<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
___________________________________________________________<br>
NEU: FreePhone - kostenlos mobil telefonieren und surfen!<br>
Jetzt informieren: <a href="http://produkte.web.de/go/webdefreephone" target="_blank">http://produkte.web.de/go/webdefreephone</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div>