Hi Gard, bringing this question over to petsc bug#953116.
On 2020-05-20 17:07, Gard Spreemann wrote:
Drew Parsons writes:
If I understand correctly, it's dangerous to simply enable 64-bit in
PETSc alone. It needs to be done all along the computational library
stack.
In the case of PETSc, i
On 20 May 2020 at 15:09, Mo Zhou wrote:
| @Edd, does it look like a decent solution for the threading trouble of
R-4.0.0?
"Maybe". We still don't have a fully reproducible bug report as the
openmp-pthread issue appears to be specific to the cpu used.
Dirk
--
http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @e
On 20/05/2020 16:09, Mo Zhou wrote:
> (forwarding my mail from -devel to -science to RFC)
> Hi fellow devs,
>
> I've suddenly got some inspiration on this problem, which resulted in a
> much better solution for the problem the original proposal confronts.
>
> I like this overhauled solution.
>
>
(forwarding my mail from -devel to -science to RFC)
Hi fellow devs,
I've suddenly got some inspiration on this problem, which resulted in a
much better solution for the problem the original proposal confronts.
I like this overhauled solution.
No extra shared libs, no extra SONAMEs. No extra burd
Hi Alastair,
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 01:39:43PM +0100, Alastair McKinstry wrote:
> I'd be in favour of 64-bit computational stacks; some of the packages
> (pnetcdf, etc) already don't work with 32-bit; It should make is
> _possible_ to run on 32-bit,
>
> but accept that performance on 64-bit coun
On 20/05/2020 10:07, Gard Spreemann wrote:
> Drew Parsons writes:
>
>> If I understand correctly, it's dangerous to simply enable 64-bit in
>> PETSc alone. It needs to be done all along the computational library
>> stack.
In the case of openmpi, I've just done an experimental 64-bit build,
4.0.
Drew Parsons writes:
> If I understand correctly, it's dangerous to simply enable 64-bit in
> PETSc alone. It needs to be done all along the computational library
> stack.
In the case of PETSc, is the intention to change to using the 64-bit
indexing option, or to provide a new additional packa
Hi Mo,
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 06:02:59AM +, Mo Zhou wrote:
> I'd like to request for review on a new lintian warning check.
> https://salsa.debian.org/lintian/lintian/-/merge_requests/309
>
> In the past we've confirmed that programs should not be linked against
> libcblas.so when they can
Source: openmpi
Severity: normal
Bug#953116 requests that petsc be built with 64 bit support for node
indices (for addressing arrays and datasets, not simply 64-bit double).
That's fair enough, it would enable massive systems to be modelled
with our software. Coronavirus protein-membrane docking,
9 matches
Mail list logo
