Re: [AMBER] Memory usage of NMR COM restraints 4 times larger in amber 16?

From: Paul Westphälinger <paul_westphaelinger.ewetel.net>
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 17:17:27 +0100

I send two mails one with and one without, the one with appendix is
still awaiting moderator approval i think. So maybe you could look into
that.


Am 22.03.2017 um 16:24 schrieb David Case:
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017, Paul Westphälinger wrote:
>> I would appreciate an if this bug was recorded in some fashion, if I can
>> help fix it I would be happy to help in any capacity.
> We know about the problem, although I'm not sure that anyone on the
> development team has a complete set of files to try to reproduce this. I know
> that I was confused earlier, thinking that you were using the newer "nfe"
> code.
>
>>> I will append the two test cases.(removed the appendix..)
> Not sure why you left out the test cases; the easier it is for someone
> to run an example that illustrates the problem, the more likely it is that
> you might get some reply.
>
> ....dac
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> AMBER mailing list
> AMBER.ambermd.org
> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
>
>


_______________________________________________
AMBER mailing list
AMBER.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
Received on Wed Mar 22 2017 - 09:30:03 PDT
Custom Search