On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 12:26 PM, Barry Smith wrote:
>
> > On Sep 25, 2017, at 1:17 PM, Kong, Fande wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 11:41 AM, Barry Smith
> wrote:
> >
> > > On Sep 25, 2017, at 11:22 AM, Kong, Fande wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 10:05 AM,
> On Sep 25, 2017, at 1:17 PM, Kong, Fande wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 11:41 AM, Barry Smith wrote:
>
> > On Sep 25, 2017, at 11:22 AM, Kong, Fande wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Stefano Zampini
> > wrote:
> > If you know the union of the different spa
On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 11:41 AM, Barry Smith wrote:
>
> > On Sep 25, 2017, at 11:22 AM, Kong, Fande wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Stefano Zampini <
> stefano.zamp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > If you know the union of the different sparsity patterns, after you
> preallocat
> On Sep 25, 2017, at 11:22 AM, Kong, Fande wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Stefano Zampini
> wrote:
> If you know the union of the different sparsity patterns, after you
> preallocate you can set all zeros to use all the entries. This way PETSc will
> not complain about n
On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Stefano Zampini wrote:
> If you know the union of the different sparsity patterns, after you
> preallocate you can set all zeros to use all the entries. This way PETSc
> will not complain about new nonzeros in successive assemblies.
>
>
Thanks, Stefano,
Yes, we
If you know the union of the different sparsity patterns, after you
preallocate you can set all zeros to use all the entries. This way PETSc
will not complain about new nonzeros in successive assemblies.
Il 25 Set 2017 7:01 PM, "Kong, Fande" ha scritto:
> Hi Matt,
>
> Thanks for your reply.
>
>
Hi Matt,
Thanks for your reply.
The sparsity pattern is slightly different from one Newton iteration to
another. We preallocate enough memory at the beginning, and want to use
that memory for the following iterations.
Does PETSc accutally free the preallocated (extra) memory? I so cannot use
it
On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 11:39 AM, Kong, Fande wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> A matrix is created with the right preallocation, and then MatAssembly is
> called. The preallocation info will be removed. We insert any values then,
> and will encounter an malloc error.
>
> My question is that we was intending
Hi All,
A matrix is created with the right preallocation, and then MatAssembly is
called. The preallocation info will be removed. We insert any values then,
and will encounter an malloc error.
My question is that we was intending to design like this way? Attached
simple example demonstrates what
Jed,
Today I fought for several hours against a strange behaviour occuring when
reusing a TS for multiple solves. You can reproduce it by applying the
attached patch.
The issue is with DMCoarsenHookAdd called in SNESSetUpMatrices, and git
blames you ;-).
Every time you call TSGetRHSMats_Private,
Yes.
> El 25 sept 2017, a las 15:37, Franck Houssen
> escribió:
>
> OK, thanks, this is helpful.
>
> If I got you correctly: beforehand, there is no way to know exactly what the
> eigen values are. If it turns out that an eigen value makes A-sigma*I or
> A-sigma*B singular, then the solve m
OK, thanks, this is helpful.
If I got you correctly: beforehand, there is no way to know exactly what the
eigen values are. If it turns out that an eigen value makes A-sigma*I or
A-sigma*B singular, then the solve may break. If so, afterwards, it's possible
to change slightly the shift to avoid
> El 25 sept 2017, a las 13:21, Franck Houssen
> escribió:
>
> What is the difference between shift and target in SLEPc ? Shift (STSetShift)
> is clear to me, but, target (EPSSetTarget) is not.
> Can somebody give an example where one want/need to have a target which would
> be different from
What is the difference between shift and target in SLEPc ? Shift (STSetShift)
is clear to me, but, target (EPSSetTarget) is not.
Can somebody give an example where one want/need to have a target which would
be different from the shift ?
Franck
Thank you, Barry. We really appreciate it.
Jakub
On 23.9.2017 16:52, Barry Smith wrote:
Jakub,
This is great, thanks for the information. I've added links from the
PETSc main webpage to your work.
Barry
On Sep 23, 2017, at 9:26 AM, Jakub Kruzik wrote:
Dear all,
I would j
On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 8:57 PM, Adrian Croucher
wrote:
>
>
> On 25/09/17 13:37, Adrian Croucher wrote:
>
>>
>> Actually it looks like DMGetDefaultSF() does already work in Fortran
>> though, and could be used to do the same thing.
>>
>> Do you think that would be a reasonable way to do it?
>>
>>
16 matches
Mail list logo