oh sorry, my fault, I can reproduce the error now. I had forgotten that I had to replace the linear term with a nonlinear one.
BR Kostas On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 7:42 AM Tetsuo Koyama <tkoyama...@gmail.com> wrote: > Sorry for lack of explanation. > > I build getfem on ubuntu:20.04 and using the configuration command > " --with-pic --enable-paralevel=2" > > I am using... > - automake > - libtool > - make > - g++ > - libqd-dev > - libqhull-dev > - libmumps-dev > - liblapack-dev > - libopenblas-dev > - libpython3-dev > - gfortran > - libmetis-dev > > I attach a Dockerfile and a Python file to reproduce. > You can reproduce by the following command. > > $ sudo docker build -t demo_parallel_laplacian_nonlinear_term.py . > > Best Regards > Tetsuo > > 2021年5月19日(水) 23:12 Konstantinos Poulios <logar...@googlemail.com>: > >> I think the instructions page is correct. What distribution do you build >> getfem on and what is your configuration command? >> Best regards >> Kostas >> >> On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 10:44 AM Tetsuo Koyama <tkoyama...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Dear Kostas >>> >>> This page (http://getfem.org/tutorial/install.html) says >>> - Parallel MUMPS, METIS and MPI4PY packages if you want to use the MPI >>> parallelized version of GetFEM. >>> >>> Is there a recommended way to install Parallel Parallel MUMPS, METIS and >>> MPI4PY ? >>> I could not find the information in the page. >>> >>> If you could give me any information I will add it to the following page. >>> http://getfem.org/install/install_linux.html >>> >>> BR >>> Tetsuo >>> >>> 2021年5月19日(水) 10:45 Tetsuo Koyama <tkoyama...@gmail.com>: >>> >>>> Dear Kostast >>>> >>>> No I haven't. I am using libmumps-seq-dev of Ubuntu repository. >>>> I will use parallel version of mumps again. >>>> >>>> BR >>>> Tetsuo >>>> >>>> 2021年5月19日(水) 4:50 Konstantinos Poulios <logar...@googlemail.com>: >>>> >>>>> Dear Tetsuo, >>>>> >>>>> Have you compiled GetFEM with the parallel version of mumps? In >>>>> Ubuntu/Debian you must link to dmumps instead of dmumps_seq for example. >>>>> >>>>> BR >>>>> Kostast >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 2:09 PM Tetsuo Koyama <tkoyama...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Dear Kostas >>>>>> >>>>>> Thank you for your report. >>>>>> I am happy that it runs well in your system. >>>>>> I will organize the procedure that can reproduce this error. Please >>>>>> wait. >>>>>> >>>>>> Best Regards Tetsuo >>>>>> >>>>>> 2021年5月18日(火) 18:10 Konstantinos Poulios <logar...@googlemail.com>: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Dear Tetsuo, >>>>>>> I could not confirm this issue. On my system the example runs well >>>>>>> both on 1 and 2 processes (it doesn't scale well though) >>>>>>> BR >>>>>>> Kostas >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [image: image.png] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sun, May 16, 2021 at 10:07 AM Tetsuo Koyama <tkoyama...@gmail.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Dear Kostas >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I am looking inside the source code. >>>>>>>> > if (generic_expressions.size()) {...} >>>>>>>> Sorry it looks complex for me. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> FYI. I found that MPI process 1 and 2 is different in the following >>>>>>>> line. >>>>>>>> > if (iter.finished(crit)) { >>>>>>>> This is in the "Newton_with_step_control" function in >>>>>>>> getfem_model_solvers.h. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "crit" is calculated by rit = res / approx_eln and res and >>>>>>>> approx_eln is ... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> $ mpirun -n 1 python demo_parallel_laplacian.py >>>>>>>> res=1.31449e-11 >>>>>>>> approx_eln=6.10757 >>>>>>>> crit=2.15222e-12 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> $ mpirun -n 2 python demo_parallel_laplacian.py >>>>>>>> res=6.02926 >>>>>>>> approx_eln=12.2151 >>>>>>>> crit=0.493588 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> res=0.135744 >>>>>>>> approx_eln=12.2151 >>>>>>>> crit=0.0111128 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I am now trying to understand what is the correct residual value of >>>>>>>> Newton(-Raphson) algorithm. >>>>>>>> I will be glad if you have an opinion. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Best Regards Tetsuo >>>>>>>> 2021年5月11日(火) 19:28 Tetsuo Koyama <tkoyama...@gmail.com>: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Dear Kostas >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> > The relevant code is in the void model::assembly function in >>>>>>>>> getfem_models.cc. The relevant code assembling the term you add with >>>>>>>>> md.add_nonlinear_term(..) must be executed inside the if condition >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > if (generic_expressions.size()) {...} >>>>>>>>> > You can have a look there and ask for further help if it looks >>>>>>>>> too complex. You should also check if the test works when you run it >>>>>>>>> with >>>>>>>>> md.add_nonlinear_term but setting the number of MPI processes to one. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks. I will check it. And the following command completed >>>>>>>>> successfully.. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> $ mpirun -n 1 python demo_parallel_laplacian.py >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> So all we have to check is compare -n 1 with -n2 . >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Best regards Tetsuo >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> 2021年5月11日(火) 18:44 Konstantinos Poulios <logar...@googlemail.com >>>>>>>>> >: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Dear Tetsuo, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The relevant code is in the void model::assembly function in >>>>>>>>>> getfem_models.cc. The relevant code assembling the term you add with >>>>>>>>>> md.add_nonlinear_term(..) must be executed inside the if condition >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> if (generic_expressions.size()) {...} >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> You can have a look there and ask for further help if it looks >>>>>>>>>> too complex. You should also check if the test works when you run it >>>>>>>>>> with >>>>>>>>>> md.add_nonlinear_term but setting the number of MPI processes to one. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> BR >>>>>>>>>> Kostas >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 10:44 AM Tetsuo Koyama < >>>>>>>>>> tkoyama...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Dear Kostas >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for your reply. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> > Interesting. In order to isolate the issue, can you also check >>>>>>>>>>> with >>>>>>>>>>> > md.add_linear_term(..) >>>>>>>>>>> > ? >>>>>>>>>>> It ends when using md.add_linear_term(..). >>>>>>>>>>> It seems that it is a problem of md.add_nonlinear_term(..). >>>>>>>>>>> Is there a point which I can check? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Best regards Tetsuo. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> 2021年5月11日(火) 17:19 Konstantinos Poulios < >>>>>>>>>>> logar...@googlemail.com>: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Dear Tetsuo, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Interesting. In order to isolate the issue, can you also check >>>>>>>>>>>> with >>>>>>>>>>>> md.add_linear_term(..) >>>>>>>>>>>> ? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards >>>>>>>>>>>> Kostas >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 12:22 AM Tetsuo Koyama < >>>>>>>>>>>> tkoyama...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear GetFEM community >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I am running MPI Parallelization of GetFEM.The running command >>>>>>>>>>>>> is >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> $ git clone https://git.savannah.nongnu.org/git/getfem.git >>>>>>>>>>>>> $ cd getfem >>>>>>>>>>>>> $ bash autogen.sh >>>>>>>>>>>>> $ ./configure --with-pic --enable-paralevel=2 >>>>>>>>>>>>> $ make >>>>>>>>>>>>> $ make install >>>>>>>>>>>>> $ mpirun -n 2 python demo_parallel_laplacian.py >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> The python script ends correctly. But when I changed the >>>>>>>>>>>>> following linear term to nonlinear term the script did not end. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -md.add_Laplacian_brick(mim, 'u') >>>>>>>>>>>>> +md.add_nonlinear_term(mim, "Grad_u.Grad_Test_u") >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Do you know the reason? >>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards Tetsuo >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
