GEOS
GEOS copied to clipboard
Adding logLevel documentation
This PR aim to document all logLevel
in GEOS and to invite the contributors to set descriptions when they enable the logLevel
wrapper:
Currently, we have this output in all Group
documentation files:
========= ========= ======== ================
Name Type Default Description
========= ========= ======== ================
[...]
logLevel integer 0 Log level
========= ========= ======== ================
This PR brings more context to all logLevels
of GEOS:
I.e. SolidMechanics_LagrangianFEM.rst
:
========= ========= ======== ========================================================================================
Name Type Default Description
========= ========= ======== ========================================================================================
[...]
logLevel integer 0 | Sets the level of information to write in the standard output (the console typically).
| A level of 0 outputs minimal information, higher levels require more.
| logLevel >= 1
| - Information on line search
| - Information on global solution scaling factor
| - Information on the timestep
| - Print residual norm
| logLevel >= 1 and configuration didn't converge
| - Information about testing new configuration and print the time step
| logLevel >= 1 and incorrect solution
| - Information about line search failed
| logLevel >= 1 and linear system
| - Information on number of iterations and residual reduction
| logLevel >= 1 and non linear system
| - Information on each newton Iteration
| logLevel >= 1 and residual norm above the max allowed residual norm
| - Indicate allowed residual norm
| logLevel >= 2
| - Output to screen the assembled linear system and solutions (matrices and vectors)
| - Infos on residuals values
| logLevel >= 2 and target set is empty
| - Warning about boundary conditions
| logLevel >= 3
| - Output to file the assembled linear system and solutions (matrices and vectors)
========= ========= ======== ========================================================================================
Codecov Report
Attention: Patch coverage is 79.50311%
with 33 lines
in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
Project coverage is 55.75%. Comparing base (
3bf12d2
) to head (b47ffe8
). Report is 8 commits behind head on develop.
:exclamation: Current head b47ffe8 differs from pull request most recent head c56f007
Please upload reports for the commit c56f007 to get more accurate results.
Additional details and impacted files
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #3089 +/- ##
===========================================
+ Coverage 55.71% 55.75% +0.03%
===========================================
Files 1031 1031
Lines 87698 87823 +125
===========================================
+ Hits 48863 48962 +99
- Misses 38835 38861 +26
:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.
How is all that connects with proposal about logLevel
labels in https://github.com/GEOS-DEV/GEOS/issues/3014 ?
This PR is related to the #3179 and not the #3014.
@TotoGaz Thanks for your feedback, in reply to your suggestion :
Would a highly coupled class be an issue? Group would only have 1 attribute & 1 getter for this class.
Or is it better to have a purely not coupled class? Group would have 1 attribute, 1 getter, and 1 method (appendLogLevelDescription()
).