Hmm, why would > the resolution with *sequential* symbolic factorisation gives ans err around > 1e-6 instead of 1e-16 for parallel one (when it works).
? One would think that doing a "sequential" symbolic factorization won't affect the answer to this huge amount? Perhaps this is the problem that needs to be addressed. Barry > On May 22, 2018, at 12:57 PM, Eric Chamberland > <eric.chamberl...@giref.ulaval.ca> wrote: > > On 22/05/18 12:11 PM, Xiaoye S. Li wrote: > > Default setting is to use sequential symbolic factorization, precisely > > due to the ParMETIS bugs. > > Ok, > > and I saw you reported the bug "a few years ago" and still have not received > a fix... > > I would like to "live with the patch" (ie working in sequential) but our > problem is that if we compute err=|Ax-b|, the resolution with *sequential* > symbolic factorisation gives ans err around 1e-6 instead of 1e-16 for > parallel one (when it works). MUMPS, also gives 1e-16 error levels. > > In our nightly tests we have to compare computed solutions and they are now > acceptable if they are of the order of 1e-15. I do *not* want to raise this > comparison to 1e-6 just because there is a bug in parmetis which forces us to > use the "unprecise" sequential options... > > In other words, I am kind of "stuck" with this non-fixed bug now... :/ > > Hope this can be fixed... > > Thanks, > > Eric
