Ozlem Ulucan wrote:

Dear Gromacs Users,

I have been trying to simulate a protein in implicit solvent. When I used a single processor by setting -nt to 1 , I did not encounter any problem. But when I tried to run the simulations using more than 1 processor I get the following error.

Fatal error:
Constraint dependencies further away than next-neighbor
in particle decomposition. Constraint between atoms 2177--2179 evaluated
on node 3 and 3, but atom 2177 has connections within 4 bonds (lincs_order)
of node 1, and atom 2179 has connections within 4 bonds of node 3.
Reduce the # nodes, lincs_order, or
try domain decomposition.

I set the lincs_order parameter in .mdp file to different values. But it did not help. I have some questions regarding the information above.

 1) Is it possible to run implicit solvent simulations in parallel?


Yes.

2) As far as I know gromacs uses domain decomposition as default. Why does in my simulations gromacs use the particle decomposition which I do not ask for.


Without seeing the exact commands you gave, there is no plausible explanation. DD is used by default.

-Justin

Any suggestions are appreciated very much.
I am ussing gromacs-4.5.4 with charmm force field and the OBC implicit solvent model. If you need further informations, probably a run input file, let me know.

Regards,

Ozlem Ulucan


--
========================================

Justin A. Lemkul
Ph.D. Candidate
ICTAS Doctoral Scholar
MILES-IGERT Trainee
Department of Biochemistry
Virginia Tech
Blacksburg, VA
jalemkul[at]vt.edu | (540) 231-9080
http://www.bevanlab.biochem.vt.edu/Pages/Personal/justin

========================================
--
gmx-users mailing list    gmx-users@gromacs.org
http://lists.gromacs.org/mailman/listinfo/gmx-users
Please search the archive at 
http://www.gromacs.org/Support/Mailing_Lists/Search before posting!
Please don't post (un)subscribe requests to the list. Use the www interface or send it to gmx-users-requ...@gromacs.org.
Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/Support/Mailing_Lists

Reply via email to