Skip to content

Paraview and VisIt readers read the same dataset differently (and both incorrectly) #1709

Open

Description

@BenWibking

Describe the bug
I opened the example-2d HDF5 dataset from openpmd-example-datasets (https://github.com/openPMD/openPMD-example-datasets/blob/draft/example-2d.tar.gz) in both Paraview (using the openpmd-api reader with a *.pmd file) and with the OpenPMD Visit reader.

Wrong in VisIt:

  • The data layout of the field data appears to be wrong in VisIt.
  • The particles do not render at all in VisIt.
  • The axes are wrong (should be x-z instead of x-y)

Wrong in Paraview:

  • The relative alignment of the field and particle data is wrong:
    • The field is plotted in the x-y plane (should be x-z)
Screenshot 2024-12-23 at 3 38 39 PM Screenshot 2024-12-23 at 3 34 37 PM

To Reproduce
Open the example-2d dataset in both Paraview and VisIt using their respective OpenPMD readers.

Expected behavior
They should be the same!

Software Environment

  • version of Paraview: 5.13.1
  • version of VisIt: 3.4.2

Additional context
Each plugin does it own data layout transformation (incorrectly): #1708

Activity

  1. changed the title [-]Paraview and VisIt readers display different viz for same dataset[/-] [+]Paraview and VisIt readers read the same dataset differently (and both incorrectly)[/+] on Dec 23, 2024
  2. BenWibking commented on Dec 24, 2024

    @BenWibking
    Author

    I've uploaded the Visit session and Paraview state files for reproducibility:
    paraview_state_openpmd_example_2d.pvsm.zip
    visit_session_openpmd_example_2d.zip

  3. BenWibking commented on Jan 3, 2025

    @BenWibking
    Author

    @ax3l Do you know what is going on here?

  4. added
    third partythird party libraries that are shipped and/or linked
    on Jan 21, 2025
  5. ax3l commented on Jan 21, 2025

    @ax3l
    Member

    Hi @BenWibking , thank you for the report!

    For the different readers, we track the issues that appear upstream:
    VisIt: https://github.com/visit-dav/visit/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aopen%20openPMD

    ParaView: https://gitlab.kitware.com/paraview/paraview/-/issues/?sort=created_date&state=all&search=openPMD&first_page_size=20

    For ParaView, I did fix the transpose for 3D data sets a while ago, but maybe there is a bug left for 2D that gets them wrong... I can test this with the latest release, thanks! I will also check if the 2D example from old WARP is actually correctly annotated or if the dataOrder and axisLabels are misformed.

    For VisIt, the current reader is directly written in HDF5 / C and might not support the openPMD 1 dataOrder attribute correctly. You are working on an implementation in openPMD-api, do I recall correctly?

  6. BenWibking commented on Jan 21, 2025

    @BenWibking
    Author

    Hi @BenWibking , thank you for the report!

    For the different readers, we track the issues that appear upstream: VisIt: https://github.com/visit-dav/visit/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aopen%20openPMD

    ParaView: https://gitlab.kitware.com/paraview/paraview/-/issues/?sort=created_date&state=all&search=openPMD&first_page_size=20

    Ok, let me know if you'd prefer that I open issues upstream for each of these. The inconsistency between the two is a sort of meta-issue that I didn't know where to best report.

    For ParaView, I did fix the transpose for 3D data sets a while ago, but maybe there is a bug left for 2D that gets them wrong... I can test this with the latest release, thanks! I will also check if the 2D example from old WARP is actually correctly annotated or if the dataOrder and axisLabels are misformed.

    For VisIt, the current reader is directly written in HDF5 / C and might not support the openPMD 1 dataOrder attribute correctly. You are working on an implementation in openPMD-api, do I recall correctly?

    Yes, I'm working on that in this repo (https://github.com/BenWibking/openpmd-visit-reader). That motivated this investigation, since I was unable to get my reader working for non-native data layout orderings (and then I discovered this inconsistency with the existing readers).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    bugthird partythird party libraries that are shipped and/or linked

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions