# VTK version in latest Paraview

**URL:** https://discourse.paraview.org/t/vtk-version-in-latest-paraview/6662
**Category:** Development
**Tags:** vtk
**Created:** [March 10, 2021, 1:34pm UTC](https://discourse.paraview.org/t/vtk-version-in-latest-paraview/6662 "2021-03-10T13:34:51Z")
**Posts on this page:** 6
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![siver](https://discourse.paraview.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/7ba0ec/32.png) [@siver](https://discourse.paraview.org/u/siver)
#### Post date: [March 10, 2021, 1:34pm UTC](https://discourse.paraview.org/t/vtk-version-in-latest-paraview/6662/1 "2021-03-10T13:34:51Z")

</div>

Dear devs,

Is ParaView 5.9.0 using a VTK version, different from 9.0.1? Thank you.

Sincerely,  
Art

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![mwestphal](https://discourse.paraview.org/user_avatar/discourse.paraview.org/mwestphal/32/17_2.png) [@mwestphal](https://discourse.paraview.org/u/mwestphal)
#### Post date: [March 10, 2021, 2:11pm UTC](https://discourse.paraview.org/t/vtk-version-in-latest-paraview/6662/2 "2021-03-10T14:11:38Z")

</div>

Yes, the VTK in ParaView 5.9.0 is 9ef62e855751ab84e13874ae8f827849217066e1

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![danlipsa](https://discourse.paraview.org/user_avatar/discourse.paraview.org/danlipsa/32/1563_2.png) [@danlipsa](https://discourse.paraview.org/u/danlipsa)
#### Post date: [March 10, 2021, 2:19pm UTC](https://discourse.paraview.org/t/vtk-version-in-latest-paraview/6662/3 "2021-03-10T14:19:07Z")

</div>

Yes, ParaView uses a VTK git SHA commited into master but different than the actual releases. This is because at ParaView release time many ParaView bugs are fixed in VTK.  
You can see that SHA but checking out the release tag and looking at the VTK submodule SHA.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![siver](https://discourse.paraview.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/7ba0ec/32.png) [@siver](https://discourse.paraview.org/u/siver)
#### Post date: [March 10, 2021, 3:04pm UTC](https://discourse.paraview.org/t/vtk-version-in-latest-paraview/6662/4 "2021-03-10T15:04:01Z")

</div>

Indeed, we observed some core dumps in the official VTK 9.0.1, but ParaView seemed uneffected, hence the question. Two more questions if I may:

1. Is **nightly** more stable than 9ef62e855751ab84e13874ae8f827849217066e1?
2. Do you know when a new official VTK release with bug fixes (9.0.2?) might happen?

Thank you so much!  
Art

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![mwestphal](https://discourse.paraview.org/user_avatar/discourse.paraview.org/mwestphal/32/17_2.png) [@mwestphal](https://discourse.paraview.org/u/mwestphal)
#### Post date: [March 10, 2021, 3:05pm UTC](https://discourse.paraview.org/t/vtk-version-in-latest-paraview/6662/5 "2021-03-10T15:05:57Z")

</div>

> Indeed, we observed some core dumps in the official VTK 9.0.1

The right way to go is to:

1. Test with vtk master if you can reproduce the issue, if not, it has been fixed already
2. If yes, open an issue on [https://gitlab.kitware.com/vtk/vtk/-/issues](https://gitlab.kitware.com/vtk/vtk/-/issues)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![siver](https://discourse.paraview.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/7ba0ec/32.png) [@siver](https://discourse.paraview.org/u/siver)
#### Post date: [March 10, 2021, 3:29pm UTC](https://discourse.paraview.org/t/vtk-version-in-latest-paraview/6662/6 "2021-03-10T15:29:47Z")

</div>

I’m sorry, I’m not used to compiling from source. I’m attempting it now. Thank you for all your advice.

Sincerely,  
Art
