-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 35
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
mesh_top1 and large numbers of geometric model edges/points #54
Comments
I think I see a problem with the input data... closing this for now while I dig deeper. |
@cwsmith let me know if you're still having issues on this --- when you ask for |
Will do. Thanks for checking in. The input geometric model was not in the same coordinate frame (different bounding box and scale) as the size field (hfun) so I was effectively getting two meshes and that was definitely not what was wanted. I'm working on a fix now and will let you know if there are problems. |
@dengwirda I fixed the coordinate frame issue and ran what I think is a valid configuration (1, below) to use a size field (hfun) and recover the geometric model vertices (mesh_top1). Unfortunately, I'm seeing long run times and high memory usage. I was unsure if feature detection (geom_feat) and/or the size field was somehow causing problems with recovery so I attempted (without much success) to disable them. Details on those additional configurations (2,3) are also listed below. Any suggestions are appreciated. Thanks in advance. 1 - feature detection enabled, top1 enabled, hfun enabledresult: killed after 45 mins, memory usage was about 50GB 2 - feature detection enabled, top1 enabled, hfun disabledresult: killed after 35 mins, memory usage was about 60GB 3 - feature detection disabled, top1 enabled, hfun disabledresult: mesh generated but does not recover the geometric model vertices/edges, there is also a warning at the end of execution
|
@dengwirda
Closing this again while I clean up the model. Sorry for the noise. |
Success! Cleaning up the model issues above, and, for now, removing the the red dots/points are vertices of the input geometric model. This mesh was generated with cwsmith/jigsaw_gis@454dea1. |
Looks good to me @cwsmith --- with default settings an approximation to the geometry will be made based on the sizing function alone (as per your figure on the right) but you can force additional refinement (to recover topology, geometric accuracy, etc, etc) with other settings, as per the mesh on the left. |
@dengwirda I'm hitting problems (long time and high memory use in the original geometry, meshes with If not, is there a way to extract some debug info from jigsaw about where the geometry may be giving problems to (I think it is stuck in Thanks in advance.
|
@cwsmith: interesting --- I was able to reproduce the non-convergence and (at a first look at least) it actually appears to be related to setting I'm not 100% on whether this behaviour is a bug or not at this stage, so will keep this open for now. |
@dengwirda Thank you. Is there a way to 'restrict' the mesh to conform to the geometry and 'disable' sharp feature detection? The screenshot below shows three meshes with |
Hello,
I'm trying to generate a mesh using jigsaw with a geometric model that has roughly 16k edges and hitting problems with memory consumption and runtime when enabling
mesh_top1
.The test repo here:
https://github.com/cwsmith/jigsaw_gis/tree/519e7e1437fbabbbe3037cee4212721f079bddb4
contains
gis.py
that loads the geometric model (.msh
) and size field (hfun) and runs jigsaw in a few seconds to generate a mesh of 358k triangles that doesn't exactly 'recover' the geometric model edges/vertices in the resulting mesh asmesh_top1
is disabled.When I add
opts.mesh_top1 = True
togis.py
jigsaw runs out of memory on a gnu/linux machine with 64GB of RAM after about 10mins. The log from the failed run is pasted below.I'm a novice jigsaw user and am concerned I have a problematic combination of settings and mesh size field that is causing the large memory usage and long runtime. Do you see anything obviously wrong? Any suggestions are appreciated.
Thank you.
verbose output from failed run
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: