On Dec 16, 2011, at 9:52 AM, Matthew Knepley wrote: > On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 9:37 AM, Dave Nystrom <dnystrom1 at comcast.net> > wrote: > I'm trying to figure out whether I can do a couple of things with petsc. > > 1. It looks like the preconditioning matrix can actually be different from > the full problem matrix. So I'm wondering if I could provide a different > preconditioning matrix for my problem and then do an LU solve of the > preconditioning matrix using the -pc_type lu as my preconditioner. > > Yes, that is what it is for. > > 2. When I build petsc, I use the --download-f-blas-lapack=yes option. I'm > wondering if petsc uses lapack under the hood or has the capability to use > lapack under the hood when one uses the -pc_type lu option. In particular, > since my matrices are band matrices from doing a discretization on a 2d > regular mesh, I'm wondering if the petsc lu solve has the ability to use the > lapack band solver dgbsv or dgbsvx. Or is it possible to use the lapack band > solver through one of the external packages that petsc can interface with. > I'm interested in this capability for smaller problem sizes that fit on a > single node and that make sense. > > We do not have any banded matrix stuff. Its either dense or sparse right now.
Dave, As I noted before, your band is so large that lapack type band solvers don't make sense. Using a general purpose sparse direct solver will be much more efficient than using the lapack band solver. Barry > > 3. I'm also wondering how I might be able to learn more about the petsc ilu > capability. My impression is that it does ilu(k) and I have tried it with > k>0 but am wondering if one of the options might allow it to do ilut and > whether as k gets big whether ilu(k) approximates lu. I currently do not > understand the petsc ilu well enough to know how much extra fill I get as I > increase k and where that extra fill might be located for the case of a band > matrix that one gets from discretization on a regular 2d mesh. > > We do not do ilu(dt). Its complicated, and we determined that it was not worth > the effort. You can get that from Hypre is you want. Certainly, for big enough > k, ilu(k) is lu but its a slow way to do it. > > Matt > > Thanks, > > Dave > > > > -- > What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their experiments > is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their experiments > lead. > -- Norbert Wiener