On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 15:26:40 +0000
"Garth N. Wells" <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 2014-01-23 15:24, Jan Blechta wrote:
> > On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 15:24:59 +0100
> > Anders Logg <[email protected]> wrote:
> > 
> >> On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 02:18:30PM +0100, Jan Blechta wrote:
> >> > On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 12:24:11 +0000
> >> > "Garth N. Wells" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > If someone would like to condense this thread, it would make a
> >> > > very nice 'question' on the Q&A page which could then be
> >> > > answered by whoever posts the question.
> >> >
> >> > I'll do it.
> >> 
> >> Great. It would be even more useful with a documented demo that
> >> explains all these issues in detail if you feel up to it.
> > 
> > Demo can come up when the question is resolved satisfactorily...
> > 
> > In fact, the two existing demos neumann-poisson, singular-poisson
> > can be
> > improved and new demo using DirichletBC(..., 'pointwise') approach
> > can be added.
> > 
> 
> I'd suggest squashing them all into one demo.

I don't agree. singular-poisson needs PETSc while neumann-poisson can
be improved that it can use PETSc for MINRES, AMG, but it can use direct
solver either when PETSc is missing.

Jan

> 
> Garth
> 
> > Jan
> > 
> >> 
> >> --
> >> Anders
> >> 
> >> 
> >> > Jan
> >> >
> >> > >
> >> > > Garth
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > On 2014-01-22 19:23, Nico Schlömer wrote:
> >> > > >> As far as I can tell, I'm trying to solve the extended
> >> > > >> system, and it has no nullspace.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > There are two separate approaches discussed here:
> >> > > >
> >> > > >   * extending the system such that the nullspace is trivial
> >> > > > (Langrange)
> >> > > >   * using the Krylov solver on the original system with the
> >> > > > nontrivial nullspace, paying a little attention to the
> >> > > > details.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > --Nico
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 8:17 PM, Nikolaus Rath
> >> > > > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> > > >> On 01/22/2014 11:08 AM, Nico Schlömer wrote:
> >> > > >>>>>>> As Garth was mentioning, this problem is delicate for
> >> > > >>>>>>> iterative solver, not only because
> >> > > >>>>>>> its indefiniteness, but because the Lagrangian
> >> > > >>>>>>> constraint you're imposing yields
> >> > > >>>>>>> a column (the last one) of the full matrix that belongs
> >> > > >>>>>>> to the kernel of the top-left block.
> >> > > >>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>> Since the nullspace is at hands, I would provide it to
> >> > > >>>>>>> the solver and then use CG+AMG,
> >> > > >>>>>>> with Jacobi relaxation at coarser scale instead Gauss
> >> > > >>>>>>> elimination (at least with petsc boomeramg).
> >> > > >>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>> Why is there a nullspace? Doesn't the \int u = 0
> >> > > >>>>>> constraint remove the
> >> > > >>>>>> remaining degree of freedom resulting from the pure
> >> > > >>>>>> Neumann boundary
> >> > > >>>>>> conditions?
> >> > > >>>>>
> >> > > >>>>> It does not remove any DOF. It adds just one DOF - the
> >> > > >>>>> Lagrange multiplier and an equation which makes the
> >> > > >>>>> system regular.
> >> > > >>>>
> >> > > >>>> I'm probably just using different terminology, but how can
> >> > > >>>> the system be
> >> > > >>>> regular if it has a nullspace? If there is u such that
> >> > > >>>> A.u = 0, I would
> >> > > >>>> say that A is singular, not regular.
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> The original problem is singular indeed. What Jan did is
> >> > > >>> add a row and
> >> > > >>> a column (Lagrange multiplier) such that the new extended
> >> > > >>> system is regular.
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> This is what I thought - the extended system does *not*
> >> > > >> have a nullspace. But the extended system is the system
> >> > > >> we're trying to solve.
> >> > > >> So I'm not sure how to understand Simone's suggestion above:
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >>>>>>> Since the nullspace is at hands, I would provide it to
> >> > > >>>>>>> the solver and then use CG+AMG,
> >> > > >>>>>>> with Jacobi relaxation at coarser scale instead Gauss
> >> > > >>>>>>> elimination (at least with petsc boomeramg).
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> As far as I can tell, I'm trying to solve the extended
> >> > > >> system, and it has no nullspace.
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> Best,
> >> > > >> Nikolaus
> >> > > >>
> >> > > > _______________________________________________
> >> > > > fenics mailing list
> >> > > > [email protected]
> >> > > > http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics
> >> > > _______________________________________________
> >> > > fenics mailing list
> >> > > [email protected]
> >> > > http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics
> >> >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > fenics mailing list
> >> > [email protected]
> >> > http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> fenics mailing list
> >> [email protected]
> >> http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > fenics mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics

_______________________________________________
fenics mailing list
[email protected]
http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics

Reply via email to