On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 at 17:20, Boyce Griffith wrote:
>
>
> FWIW, we implemented some Vanka-type multigrid smoothers for the
> incompressible Stokes equations, and we found that ~15% of total runtime was
> spent dealing with options on real (or at least real-ish) test problems. The
> configure-ti
> On Jun 29, 2018, at 9:58 AM, Lisandro Dalcin wrote:
>
> On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 at 20:17, Lawrence Mitchell wrote:
>>
>>
>> OK, I've done some more benchmarking now, and cooked up a very simple test
>> case. I just solve a tiny problem 10 million times.
>>
>> On master, this completes on m
On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 at 20:17, Lawrence Mitchell wrote:
>
>
> OK, I've done some more benchmarking now, and cooked up a very simple test
> case. I just solve a tiny problem 10 million times.
>
> On master, this completes on my machine in:
>
> If I leave the viewers on, this takes ages:
>
> (maste
"Kong, Fande" writes:
> On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 3:03 PM, Jed Brown wrote:
>
>> "Kong, Fande" writes:
>>
>> > There is also a question about making -help useful. We would like
>> these
>> >
>> >> sort of diagnostic options to be provided in -help exactly once in on
>> >> organized way. The
On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 3:03 PM, Jed Brown wrote:
> "Kong, Fande" writes:
>
> > There is also a question about making -help useful. We would like
> these
> >
> >> sort of diagnostic options to be provided in -help exactly once in on
> >> organized way. The normal way to do that is to put i
"Kong, Fande" writes:
> There is also a question about making -help useful. We would like these
>
>> sort of diagnostic options to be provided in -help exactly once in on
>> organized way. The normal way to do that is to put it in the
>> *SetFromOptions.
>>
>
> Like this one. It is even bet
There is also a question about making -help useful. We would like these
> sort of diagnostic options to be provided in -help exactly once in on
> organized way. The normal way to do that is to put it in the
> *SetFromOptions.
>
Like this one. It is even better if we have an option to dump a
Lisandro Dalcin writes:
> On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 at 18:51, Smith, Barry F. wrote:
>>
>>
>>I am having trouble tracking the following issue (and people's opinion on
>> it) in the pull requests so I am starting an email thread to discuss the
>> issue.
>>
>>Currently - (this is my understand
> On 28 Jun 2018, at 17:24, Lisandro Dalcin wrote:
>
> On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 at 19:16, Lawrence Mitchell wrote:
>>
>> This uses the Push/Pop stuff that I added in PR#604, in response to noting
>> (in PCPATCH runs) that 90% of the time was spent in XXXViewFromOptions.
>> After adding the pus
On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 at 19:16, Lawrence Mitchell wrote:
>
> This uses the Push/Pop stuff that I added in PR#604, in response to noting
> (in PCPATCH runs) that 90% of the time was spent in XXXViewFromOptions.
> After adding the push/pop pair, this dropped to basically 0%. I didn't do
> further
On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 at 18:51, Smith, Barry F. wrote:
>
>
>I am having trouble tracking the following issue (and people's opinion on
> it) in the pull requests so I am starting an email thread to discuss the
> issue.
>
>Currently - (this is my understanding)
>
> 1) PetscObjectViewFromOp
> On 28 Jun 2018, at 16:51, Smith, Barry F. wrote:
>
>
> I am having trouble tracking the following issue (and people's opinion on
> it) in the pull requests so I am starting an email thread to discuss the
> issue.
>
> Currently - (this is my understanding)
>
> 1) PetscObjectViewFro
I am having trouble tracking the following issue (and people's opinion on
it) in the pull requests so I am starting an email thread to discuss the issue.
Currently - (this is my understanding)
1) PetscObjectViewFromOptions() is very slow
2) Many calls are made to this routine directl
13 matches
Mail list logo
