On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 5:04 PM, Jed Brown <jedbrown at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 4:58 PM, Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > >> >> As always a COMPLETE error report is useful. There are a million ways >> you could see this change in behavior but we can't spend time guessing. At >> a minimum please send the entire error output. >> >> I note in 3.3 the KSPDefaultConverged() still checks for NAN and >> returns a negative converged reason (not an error) so I can only guess why >> you are getting different behavior without more information., >> > > This is probably the main complaint: > > http://petsc.cs.iit.edu/petsc/petsc-dev/rev/7d6f5cbe67bc > Yes, but what in PETSc code could possibly create these NaNs? Matt > > >> >> >> Barry >> >> On Jul 25, 2012, at 4:35 PM, Kirk, Benjamin (JSC-EG311) wrote: >> >> > Hello - >> > >> > I've been using PETSc 3.1 for quite a while now and have been hesitant >> to >> > upgrade because of some new behavior I found in 3.2. Let me explain... >> > >> > In petsc-3.1, if the KSP encountered a NaN it would return it to the >> > application code. We actually liked this feature because it gives us an >> > opportunity to catch the NaN and attempt recovery, in our case by >> decreasing >> > the time step and trying again. >> > >> > It seems in petsc-3.2, however, that PETSc itself aborts internally, so >> we >> > are unable to recover from the situation. >> > >> > Is there any way to get the old behavior back? >> > >> > Thanks, >> > >> > -Ben >> > >> >> > -- 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120725/39ac3d3c/attachment.html>
