This definitely seems to be a set of bugs.<div>Can you share your data privately with us ? So we can track that down ?</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks,</div><div><br></div><div>Seb</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Brian Corrie <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:bcorrie@sfu.ca" target="_blank">bcorrie@sfu.ca</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Hello all,<br>
<br>
I was wondering if someone could provide me with some advice. I am trying to work with a large-ish (not really that large) volume data set. It is a 698x69x665 unsigned byte data set (~320MB).<br>
<br>
When working with Paraview (3.98.0-RC1) operations on the data set are quite cumbersome and relatively simple operations cause all sorts of havoc. I am wondering if there is something odd with my set up or are my expectations of interacting with a largeish volume data set too high. The specs for my workstation are:<br>
<br>
Windows 7 Pro, 64 bit, 2 X5690 processors (12 cores) at 3.47 GHz, 24 GB of memory, nVidia Quadro 6000 graphics card. Pretty loaded...<br>
<br>
Rendering the data set with surface or volume is relatively interactive. When I try to apply other common filters (clip, threshold, isosurface) strange things occur:<br>
<br>
1) Applying a Clip filter causes Paraview to eventually consume 100% of the memory on my machine (24 GB). The computation of the filter runs forever, and I essentially have to kill off Paraview (the filter application doesn't complete after waiting several minutes).<br>
<br>
2) Applying a Threshold filter causes the same to occur. Basically causes memory usage to climb to 100% (24 GB). The filter never completes (at least not before my patience runs out 8-)<br>
<br>
3) Applying a Contour threshold works but strange things happen after isosurface creation. It creates a large polygon mesh (9M cells). With that said, memory footprint is still quite small. When interacting it renders using LOD so it is interactive. When I stop interacting it takes a couple of seconds to render at full resolution and another two seconds or so after it reaches full resolution LOD before I can interact with the application again. Approximately 4 seconds between stopping one interaction with the visualization (e.g. rotating the model) and being able to interact with the application again. Performance/interaction wise that is OK. The main problem is that only half the data set is rendered (see the image attached) at full LOD. There is no clip plane in the pipeline and yet half the data is missing in the display. The image should be a full sphere. When rendered at the lower LOD the entire data set is displayed, when rendered at full LOD the data is not.<br>
<br>
The above does not seem normal. The data set is large, but not huge. I certainly wouldn't expect the memory usage to spike to 24 GB and the rendering with the isosurface is very odd.<br>
<br>
Any advice from more experienced Paraview users? Should I get better performance/results? I would have thought so, are my expectations our to lunch? Or is this a bug that I should report?<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
<br>
Brian<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</font></span><br>_______________________________________________<br>
Powered by <a href="http://www.kitware.com" target="_blank">www.kitware.com</a><br>
<br>
Visit other Kitware open-source projects at <a href="http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html" target="_blank">http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html</a><br>
<br>
Please keep messages on-topic and check the ParaView Wiki at: <a href="http://paraview.org/Wiki/ParaView" target="_blank">http://paraview.org/Wiki/ParaView</a><br>
<br>
Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:<br>
<a href="http://www.paraview.org/mailman/listinfo/paraview" target="_blank">http://www.paraview.org/mailman/listinfo/paraview</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>