[vtkusers] Potential bug in graph pedigreeId handling / AbstractArray::LookupValue

[Jeff Baumes]

It is unclear what changed exactly, but the current behavior is that for
numeric arrays, setting data with SetValue() (which is what AddVertex
ultimately does to the pedigree ID array), does not in fact invoke
DataChanged() on the array which would signal the lookup to rebuild on the
next LookupValue() call (which is what FindVertex() performs). This was
done for performance reasons, and perhaps this change was made between 5.8
and 5.10.

If you call pedigreeIds->DataChanged() just before the call to
FindVertex(), the issue should be resolved.


On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 9:28 AM, Adrian Friebel <friebel at izbi.uni-leipzig.de
> wrote:

> Hey,
> so far I compiled my software against vtk 5.8. Recently I tried to compile
> it against 5.10.1 and noticed unexpected behaviour while adding vertices to
> a graph while passing pedigree ids.
> Below a minimal example and its output:
>
> #include <stdio.h>
> #include <iostream>
>
> #include <vtkDataSetAttributes.h>
> #include <vtkMutableUndirectedGraph.h>
> #include <vtkSmartPointer.h>
> #include <vtkUnsignedLongArray.h>
>
> int  main(int argc, char **argv)
> {
>     vtkSmartPointer<vtkMutableUndirectedGraph> graph = vtkSmartPointer<
> vtkMutableUndirectedGraph>::New();
>
>     vtkSmartPointer<vtkUnsignedLongArray> pedigreeIds = vtkSmartPointer<
> vtkUnsignedLongArray>::New();
>     pedigreeIds->Initialize();
>     pedigreeIds->SetName("Pedigree IDs");
>
>     graph->GetVertexData()->SetPedigreeIds(pedigreeIds);
>
>     for(unsigned int i=0; i<10; ++i) {
>         vtkIdType v = graph->AddVertex(i*100);
>         std::cout << "i = " << i << ": v = " << v <<
>                 ", graph->GetVertex[..]->GetVariantValue( " << v << ") =
> " << graph->GetVertexData()->GetPedigreeIds()->GetVariantValue(v) <<
>                 ", graph->FindVertex(" << i << "*100) = " <<
> graph->FindVertex(i*100) << std::endl;
>     }
>     return 0;
> }
>
> VTK-5.8:
> i = 0: v = 0, graph->GetVertex[..]->GetVariantValue( 0) = 0,
> graph->FindVertex(0*100) = 0
> i = 1: v = 1, graph->GetVertex[..]->GetVariantValue( 1) = 100,
> graph->FindVertex(1*100) = 1
> i = 2: v = 2, graph->GetVertex[..]->GetVariantValue( 2) = 200,
> graph->FindVertex(2*100) = 2
> i = 3: v = 3, graph->GetVertex[..]->GetVariantValue( 3) = 300,
> graph->FindVertex(3*100) = 3
> i = 4: v = 4, graph->GetVertex[..]->GetVariantValue( 4) = 400,
> graph->FindVertex(4*100) = 4
> i = 5: v = 5, graph->GetVertex[..]->GetVariantValue( 5) = 500,
> graph->FindVertex(5*100) = 5
> i = 6: v = 6, graph->GetVertex[..]->GetVariantValue( 6) = 600,
> graph->FindVertex(6*100) = 6
> i = 7: v = 7, graph->GetVertex[..]->GetVariantValue( 7) = 700,
> graph->FindVertex(7*100) = 7
> i = 8: v = 8, graph->GetVertex[..]->GetVariantValue( 8) = 800,
> graph->FindVertex(8*100) = 8
> i = 9: v = 9, graph->GetVertex[..]->GetVariantValue( 9) = 900,
> graph->FindVertex(9*100) = 9
>
> VTK-5.10.1:
> i = 0: v = 0, graph->GetVertex[..]->GetVariantValue( 0) = 0,
> graph->FindVertex(0*100) = 0
> i = 1: v = 1, graph->GetVertex[..]->GetVariantValue( 1) = 100,
> graph->FindVertex(1*100) = 1
> i = 2: v = 2, graph->GetVertex[..]->GetVariantValue( 2) = 200,
> graph->FindVertex(2*100) = -1
> i = 3: v = 3, graph->GetVertex[..]->GetVariantValue( 3) = 300,
> graph->FindVertex(3*100) = 3
> i = 4: v = 4, graph->GetVertex[..]->GetVariantValue( 4) = 400,
> graph->FindVertex(4*100) = -1
> i = 5: v = 5, graph->GetVertex[..]->GetVariantValue( 5) = 500,
> graph->FindVertex(5*100) = -1
> i = 6: v = 6, graph->GetVertex[..]->GetVariantValue( 6) = 600,
> graph->FindVertex(6*100) = -1
> i = 7: v = 7, graph->GetVertex[..]->GetVariantValue( 7) = 700,
> graph->FindVertex(7*100) = 7
> i = 8: v = 8, graph->GetVertex[..]->GetVariantValue( 8) = 800,
> graph->FindVertex(8*100) = -1
> i = 9: v = 9, graph->GetVertex[..]->GetVariantValue( 9) = 900,
> graph->FindVertex(9*100) = -1
>
>
> It seems that there is something wrong with the AbstractArray::LookupValue
> in 5.10.1, since the array entries value->pedId are made.
> I am aware that 6.1 was released some time ago. Maybe the issue was solved
> already, but since I couldn't find any reports on this I thought I might
> inform you guys.
> Or am I just missing some newly introduced update call?
>
> Best,
> Adrian.
>
> --
> Dipl.-Inform. Adrian Friebel
> Research Group for Multicellular Systems Biology
> Interdisciplinary Centre for BioInformatics
> University of Leipzig
> Haertelstrasse 16-18
> 04107 Leipzig
> Germany
> Tel.: +49 341 97-16627
> email:  adrian.friebel at uni-leipzig.de
>
> _______________________________________________
> Powered by www.kitware.com
>
> Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/
> opensource/opensource.html
>
> Please keep messages on-topic and check the VTK FAQ at:
> http://www.vtk.org/Wiki/VTK_FAQ
>
> Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
> http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/vtkusers
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://public.kitware.com/pipermail/vtkusers/attachments/20140827/b3f80044/attachment.html>