Skip to content

Conversation

roystgnr
Copy link
Member

@roystgnr roystgnr commented Oct 9, 2025

We support using the same id for different boundary sets of different types, but we don't support it well yet, which is one reason MOOSE (and other downstream codes?) don't really support it at all. Let's start fixing that. These methods let us do id removal and renumbering for one boundary type at a time, not just for all types at once.

We support using the same id for different boundary sets of different
types, but we don't support it *well* yet, which is one reason MOOSE
(and other downstream codes?) don't really support it at all.  Let's
start fixing that.
We support using the same id for different boundary sets of different
types, but we don't support it *well* yet, which is one reason MOOSE
(and other downstream codes?) don't really support it at all.  Let's
continue fixing that.
Fully regenerating all our caches is overkill in some situations
This covers node+edge+side ids, at least.
@moosebuild
Copy link

moosebuild commented Oct 9, 2025

Job Coverage, step Generate coverage on a01b148 wanted to post the following:

Coverage

034308 #4268 a01b14
Total Total +/- New
Rate 64.96% 64.98% +0.02% 70.86%
Hits 76814 76923 +109 107
Misses 41432 41451 +19 44

Diff coverage report

Full coverage report

Warnings

  • New new line coverage rate 70.86% is less than the suggested 90.0%

This comment will be updated on new commits.

We should have done this while we were at it with libMesh#4247, but better late
than never.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants