Hello,
I used to use MUMPS directly with sparse multiple RHS. Now I use MUMPS
through PETSc interface and solution for multiple RHS takes 1.5-2 times
longer (MatMatSolve).
My first question is whether do you use multiple RHS internally or you
solve one-by-one?
Second guess concerns the option:
On 11.12.2011, at 13:45, Uwe Schlifkowitz wrote:
> Dear list,
>
> as explained in the last thread (see
> http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/2011-August/009706.html )
> about MatGetDiagonal, the fix for a bug was pushed to petsc-dev.
>
> My results from running example 52 from
> ~pe
Dear list,
as explained in the last thread (see
http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/2011-August/009706.html ) about
MatGetDiagonal, the fix for a bug was pushed to petsc-dev.
My results from running example 52 from
~petsc-dev/src/ksp/ksp/examples/tutorials/ex52.c are attached below.
Is there an easy way to change these options? From MATSOLVERPASTIX,
it seems that no command line options to control this.
http://www.mcs.anl.gov/petsc/petsc-current/docs/manualpages/Mat/MATSOLVERPASTIX.html
Do I have to modify PaStiX.py and recompile? If yes, would you like to
give me some hints
On Dec 11, 2011, at 9:29 AM, Alexander Grayver wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I used to use MUMPS directly with sparse multiple RHS. Now I use MUMPS
> through PETSc interface and solution for multiple RHS takes 1.5-2 times
> longer (MatMatSolve).
> My first question is whether do you use multiple RHS int
Looks like Pastix is running with different options hence different
performance.
Barry
On Dec 11, 2011, at 10:08 AM, Xiangdong Liang wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 9:04 AM, Matthew Knepley wrote:
>> On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 12:05 AM, Xiangdong Liang
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello PETSc team
On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 9:04 AM, Matthew Knepley wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 12:05 AM, Xiangdong Liang
> wrote:
>>
>> Hello PETSc team,
>>
>> I was using PaStiX within petsc 3.1-p8. Today, I am trying PaStiX
>> within petsc-dev. However, For the same code, solving the same linear
>> system
chment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20111211/c4f324d1/attachment.htm>
Hello PETSc team,
I was using PaStiX within petsc 3.1-p8. Today, I am trying PaStiX
within petsc-dev. However, For the same code, solving the same linear
system takes longer time (120s vs 90s) in petsc-dev. Both are compiled
with debugging mode off. Is it possible that the newer PaStiX is
slower t
