On Aug 8, 2012, at 9:08 PM, Satish Balay <balay at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
> Barry - you forgot to commit/push the interface files in
> src/ksp/pc/impls/fieldsplit/ftn-custom.
Thanks. I forgot to hg add the new files :-(
>
> http://petsc.cs.iit.edu/petsc/petsc-dev/rev/40f9515d8b01
>
> Perhaps this interface addition can go into petsc-3.3?
No
>
> That patch [with a minor fix] can be easily applied to petsc-3.1 to
> get the link working. [old iffy functionality is a different matter :)]
Users are free to shot themselves in the foot if they want to so Colin
certainly could back-port this but I recommend upgrading.
Barry
>
> Satish
>
> On Wed, 8 Aug 2012, Barry Smith wrote:
>
>>
>> Well the field split stuff in 3.1 is rather iffy anyways. You really need
>> to take the couple hours and do the upgrade before trying to add new
>> features to the fortran code you are using. The time to upgrade will be
>> much less than time spent in work arounds.
>>
>> Barry
>>
>> On Aug 8, 2012, at 8:52 PM, Colin McAuliffe <cjm2176 at columbia.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> Is there an alternative to this routine that will allow me to define
>>> hierarchical field splits in 3.1p8? It will be a fairly significant
>>> undertaking to upgrade the fortran code I am using to be compatible with
>>> newer versions of petsc.
>>>
>>> Colin
>>>
>>> Quoting Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov>:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Colin,
>>>>
>>>> I'm sorry we never had a FORTRAN interface for this routine. You'll
>>>> need to switch to petsc-dev
>>>> http://www.mcs.anl.gov/petsc/developers/index.html to use that function.
>>>>
>>>> Barry
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Aug 8, 2012, at 7:54 PM, Colin McAuliffe <cjm2176 at columbia.edu>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Thanks I will look into DM. Is PCFieldSplitGetSubKSP in petsc version
>>>>> 3.1p8 callable from fortran? I am getting the following error when I
>>>>> compile the fortran code, and I cant figure out if this is an error in
>>>>> my code or what.
>>>>>
>>>>> Undefined symbols for architecture x86_64:
>>>>> "_pcfieldsplitgetsubksp_", referenced from:
>>>>> _umacr6_ in umacr6.o
>>>>> ld: symbol(s) not found for architecture x86_64
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> thanks
>>>>> Colin
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Quoting Matthew Knepley <knepley at gmail.com>:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 8:48 AM, Colin McAuliffe <cjm2176 at
>>>>>> columbia.edu>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hello all,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When using PCFieldSplitSetIS to define splits within splits, should the
>>>>>>> IS
>>>>>>> contain indices in the original matrix or in the next highest split
>>>>>>> level?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The next highest split level. You might consider using a DM if you have
>>>>>> some structure (like discretization on a mesh).
>>>>>> This should handle all the index-wrangling for you. It is new, but
>>>>>> intended
>>>>>> for just this kind of thing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, my matrix is in aij format but one of the sub fields has a block
>>>>>>> diagonal structure. Is it still possible use block jacobi on this field?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Matt
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks and all the best
>>>>>>> Colin
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Colin McAuliffe
>>>>>>> PhD Candidate
>>>>>>> Columbia University
>>>>>>> Department of Civil Engineering and Engineering Mechanics
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Colin McAuliffe
>>>>> PhD Candidate
>>>>> Columbia University
>>>>> Department of Civil Engineering and Engineering Mechanics
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Colin McAuliffe
>>> PhD Candidate
>>> Columbia University
>>> Department of Civil Engineering and Engineering Mechanics
>>
>>
>
