>From a research perspective, it doesn't make sense to view these preconditioners as black boxes. Your problem will likely have an elliptic component (which you might approach using a multilevel method such as PCGAMG, PCML, PCHYPRE, or PCBDDC, all of which can accept some problem-specific input information as well as tunable parameters) combined (perhaps using PCFIELDSPLIT) with a transport solver (perhaps one-level domain decomposition). The details of the splits will take some thought and you'll want to compare to monolithic (unsplit) 1-level domain decomposition methods with suitably chosen subdomains and/or geometric multigrid. One way to start would be to do a literature search and try to reproduce the results from some methods in the literature. After that, you'll have a baseline for comparison and probably get some ideas about composition.
"Park, Heeho via petsc-dev" <petsc-dev@mcs.anl.gov> writes: > Hi PETSc developers, > > I’m writing my proposal for my dissertation research at UIUC that will study > on effectiveness of preconditioners for anisothermal, multiphase porous media > flow calculations in parallel using PFLOTRAN. I know the link below lists > preconditioners but from your experience, which preconditioning packages > provide reliable and efficient PILUT, AMG, SA-AMG preconditioners for PETSc > and do you have other preconditioner recommendations? > I used hypre PILUT, but the performance and the linear iteration count to > solve a matrix is worse than ILU(0) which is not what I expected. > > https://www.mcs.anl.gov/petsc/documentation/linearsolvertable.html > > Heeho Daniel Park > > ! ------------------------------------ ! > Sandia National Laboratories > Org: 08844, R&D > Work: 505-844-1319 > ! ------------------------------------ !