> > >
> > > > >I don't see a need to add a MatSORIS().
> > > > >
> > > > > Barry
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2) I don't want to use Richardson iter
On Jun 9, 2012, at 8:26 PM, Jed Brown wrote:
> I think he wants to manage the messages at a higher level and call a matrix
> kernel for the partial sweeps.
>
> I would prefer to write the communication primitives so that GS for each
> matrix format is simple.
I am not sure if this is the r
t to take a residual in the iterator
> (KSP) and if symmetric G-S is requested then it should drive this I think.
> > > > >
> > > > > Look at PCApplyRichardson_SOR().
> > > > >
> > > > > SOR does two sweeps in each application; I'm not wild about that
> because a good way to run G-S in a V(1,1) cycle is to do a forward sweep in
> pre smoothing and a backward sweep in post smoothing.
> > > > >
> > > > > Well, MatSOR() has this flag MatSORType that can specify forward
> and reverse. You have one PC for the down-smoother and another for the
> up-smoother, then configure one to be a forward sweep and the other to be
> reverse.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20120609/ec5787f4/attachment.html>
On Jun 9, 2012, at 8:18 PM, Jed Brown wrote:
> He is going to alternate between smoothing some points and sending messages.
Fine but that is all INSIDE a single SOR sweep? So I was wrong to say
PCSORSetIS() maps to MatSORSetIS() it is PCSORSSetISs() maps to MatSORSetISs()
he won't be calling
at
> because a good way to run G-S in a V(1,1) cycle is to do a forward sweep in
> pre smoothing and a backward sweep in post smoothing.
> > > >
> > > > Well, MatSOR() has this flag MatSORType that can specify forward and
> reverse. You have one PC for the down-smoother and another for the
> up-smoother, then configure one to be a forward sweep and the other to be
> reverse.
> > >
> >
>
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20120609/af07042b/attachment.html>
On Jun 9, 2012, at 8:01 PM, Jed Brown wrote:
> Parallel Gauss-Seidel.
But if you know in advance the IS that you are providing (that determines
the order of the nodes smoothed) then why would you change it the next
iteration? That is, if you are providing the IS then it is in no way
async
at
> because a good way to run G-S in a V(1,1) cycle is to do a forward sweep in
> pre smoothing and a backward sweep in post smoothing.
> > >
> > > Well, MatSOR() has this flag MatSORType that can specify forward and
> reverse. You have one PC for the down-smoother and another for the
> up-smoother, then configure one to be a forward sweep and the other to be
> reverse.
> >
>
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20120609/6100485e/attachment.html>
On Jun 9, 2012, at 7:47 PM, Jed Brown wrote:
> Fine, but I think Mark is going to change the IS every time MatSOR is called.
Surely not. What kind of weird-ass algorithm would that be?
Barry
> Either will work, but a separate call is awkward if it's not useful to be
> persistent.
>
>
smoothing and a backward sweep in post smoothing.
> >
> > Well, MatSOR() has this flag MatSORType that can specify forward and
> reverse. You have one PC for the down-smoother and another for the
> up-smoother, then configure one to be a forward sweep and the other to be
> reverse.
>
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20120609/f90a8337/attachment.html>
On Jun 9, 2012, at 6:51 PM, Jed Brown wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 9, 2012 at 6:43 PM, Mark F. Adams
> wrote:
> 1) I need a G-S kernel that takes an IS of indices to process and a flag to
> process them in forward or reverse order. How should I proceed to do this.
> Should I just clone sor?
>
> Yo
I would like a parallel G-S to PETSc. I have to design questions:
1) I need a G-S kernel that takes an IS of indices to process and a flag to
process them in forward or reverse order. How should I proceed to do this.
Should I just clone sor?
2) I don't want to use Richardson iterations for G
rubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20120609/13b5956c/attachment.html>
b6113ba9
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20120609/1a064e18/attachment.html>
Yup, there are truckloads of cool possibilities of alternatives here.
Barry
On Jun 9, 2012, at 4:35 PM, Jed Brown wrote:
> Forwarding here in case anyone has comments on this approach to
> MatMatMultSymbolic. The idea is to use a heap as a priority queue for the
> next nontrivial entry i
even though they are a Mat. It's
important to keep the dependencies straight.
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20120609/2f4c6921/attachment.html>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20120609/1dda185d/attachment.html>
annot be in src/dm/. This
breaks --with-single-library=0.
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20120609/87dffe43/attachment.html>
It calls a bunch of PC functions, therefore it cannot be in src/dm/. This
breaks --with-single-library=0.
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20120609/c5c8e725/attachment.html>
Lisandro wrote this. Not sure if it is checked in.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 8, 2012, at 5:18 PM, Richard Katz wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Writing to ask that you again consider this feature request.
>
> Thanks,
> Rich
>
>
> On Jan 8, 2012 2:43 PM, "Richard Katz" wrote:
>> Dear all,
>>
>> I
19 matches
Mail list logo
