I am having problems with the following piece of code in petsc 3.2 but
not 3.1 (with syntax changes where appropriate):
Mat XBI;
Mat adj = 0;
MatPartitioning part = 0;
IS is = 0;
// Now declare XBI as MPIAIJ and fill it.
MatConvert(XBI, MATMPIADJ, MAT_INITIAL_MATRIX, &adj);
MatPartitioningCreate
g you are hitting.
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120126/585e364b/attachment.htm>
Don't even touch VISS, focus on RS. What solver did you use in the run you
sent the output for?
* If SS please rerun (with -snes_monitor) with RS and send the output again.
* If RS then it is very puzzling that you get that slow convergence since
the number of active constraints do
Barry,
There are two sets of output for both virs and viss. Slow convergence aside I
can't see why line search fails after we hit lower bound at some nodes? I tried
quadratic and cubic line search both and got the same result.
Best,
Ata
On Jan 26, 2012, at 9:07 PM, Barry Smith wrote:
>
>
Solve(). Is this normal for dev?
>
> Thanks very much!
>
> Best regards,
>
> Rebecca
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Jan 26, 2012, at 5:06 PM, Jed Brown wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 19:00, Mark F. Adams
>> wrote:
>> I'm guessing that PETSc recently changed and now filters out 0.0 in
>> MatSetValues ... is this true?
>>
>> Did the option MAT_IGNORE_ZERO_ENTRIES get set somehow?
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120126/e6ef814f/attachment-0001.htm>
used during MatSetValues calls =0
> using I-node (on process 0) routines: found 8192 nodes, limit used
> is 5
> Input Error: Incorrect objective type.
> Input Error: Incorrect objective type.
> At column 0, pivotL() encounters zero diagonal at line 708 in file
> symbfact.c
> At column 0, pivotL() encounters zero diagonal at line 708 in file
> symbfact.c
>
> Moreover, When I use valgrind with --leak-check=yes --track-origins=yes,
> there are 441 errors from 219 contexts in PetscInitialize() before calling
> SNESSolve(). Is this normal for dev?
>
> Thanks very much!
>
> Best regards,
>
> Rebecca
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Jan 26, 2012, at 5:06 PM, Jed Brown wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 19:00, Mark F. Adams columbia.edu>wrote:
>
>> I'm guessing that PETSc recently changed and now filters out 0.0 in
>> MatSetValues ... is this true?
>>
>
> Did the option MAT_IGNORE_ZERO_ENTRIES get set somehow?
>
>
>
>
--
What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their
experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their
experiments lead.
-- Norbert Wiener
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120126/8a692b2f/attachment.htm>
