Hi Jed,
The physics of the problem requires evaluation of M^{-1} from four
sub-matrices. That's why I'm constrained to use it as MATNEST. The other
option seems to be MatGetLocalSubMatrix but it seemed easier for me to go
with MATNEST (particularly to avoid the local index sets).
Regards,
Bikash
On May 11, 2015 1:41 PM, "Jed Brown" <j...@jedbrown.org> wrote:
> Bikash Kanungo <bik...@umich.edu> writes:
>
> > Hi Patrick,
> >
> > I have M^{-1} computed explicitly and stored as MATNEST. Providing
> > MATCOMPOSITE of M^{-1}H to SLEPc standard eigenvalue solvers seems an
> > option. Does it has any additional cost of explicitly building
>
> Why are you storing M^{-1} as MATNEST?
>
