[petsc-users] Linesearch algorithm

-- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120515/1ac8efc1/attachment.htm>

[petsc-users] Fwd: PCGASMSetLocalSubdomains

t; non-overlapping subdomains. > > How will you ensure that the coarse basis functions are a partition of unity? Yes, I do some weighting. -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120515/f85f13b3/attachment.htm>

[petsc-users] Fwd: PCGASMSetLocalSubdomains

more natural because we avoid factorization on the non-overlapping subdomains. -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120515/c585f2b9/attachment.htm>

[petsc-users] PCGASMSetLocalSubdomains

TML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120515/b312eeea/attachment.htm>

[petsc-users] Fwd: PCGASMSetLocalSubdomains

>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 12:59 AM, Hui Zhang >>>>>>>>>> hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 20, 2012, at 12:41 AM, Dmitry Karpeev wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 3:08 PM, Hui Zhang >>>>>>>>>>> hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> I have a new problem: the results from ASM and GASM are different >>>>>>>>>>>> and it seems >>>>>>>>>>>> GASM has something wrong with SetModifySubMatrices. Numerical >>>>>>>>>>>> tests are with >>>>>>>>>>>> each subdomain supported only by one subdomain. There are no >>>>>>>>>>>> problems when >>>>>>>>>>>> I did not modify submatrices. But when I modify submatrices, >>>>>>>>>>>> there are problems >>>>>>>>>>>> with GASM but no problems with ASM. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> For example, I use two subdomains. In the first case each >>>>>>>>>>>> subdomain is supported by >>>>>>>>>>>> one processor and there seems no problem with GASM. But when I use >>>>>>>>>>>> run my program >>>>>>>>>>>> with only one proc. so that it supports both of the two >>>>>>>>>>>> subdomains, the iteration >>>>>>>>>>>> number is different from the first case and is much larger. On >>>>>>>>>>>> the other hand >>>>>>>>>>>> ASM has no such problem. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Are the solutions the same? >>>>>>>>>>>> What problem are you solving? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Yes, the solutions are the same. That's why ASM gives the same >>>>>>>>>>> results with one or >>>>>>>>>>> two processors. But GASM did not. >>>>>>>>>>> Sorry, I wasn't clear: ASM and GASM produced different solutions in >>>>>>>>>>> the case of two domains per processor? >>>>>>>>>>> I'm solving the Helmholtz equation. Maybe >>>>>>>>>>> I can prepare a simpler example to show this difference. >>>>>>>>>>> That would be helpful. >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Dmitry. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Dmitry. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 15, 2012, at 6:46 PM, Dmitry Karpeev wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> You should be able to. >>>>>>>>>>>>> This behavior is the same as in PCASM, >>>>>>>>>>>>> except in GASM the matrices live on subcommunicators. >>>>>>>>>>>>> I am in transit right now, but I can take a closer look in Friday. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Dmitry >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 15, 2012, at 8:07, Hui Zhang >>>>>>>>>>>> hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 15, 2012, at 11:19 AM, Hui Zhang wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Dmitry, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thanks a lot! Currently, I'm not using ISColoring. Just comes >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> another question >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on PCGASMSetModifySubMatrices(). The user provided function has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the prototype >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> func (PC pc,PetscInt nsub,IS *row,IS *col,Mat *submat,void >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *ctx); >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think the coloumns from the parameter 'col' are always the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> same as the rows >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from the parameter 'row'. Because PCGASMSetLocalSubdomains() >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only accepts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> index sets but not rows and columns. Has I misunderstood >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> As I tested, the row and col are always the same. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have a new question. Am I allowed to SetLocalToGlobalMapping() >>>>>>>>>>>>>> for the submat's >>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the above func()? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hui >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hui >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 11, 2012, at 3:36 PM, Dmitry Karpeev wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, that's right. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There is no good way to help the user assemble the subdomains >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> at the moment beyond the 2D stuff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is expected that they are generated from mesh subdomains. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Each IS does carry the subdomains subcomm. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There is ISColoringToList() that is supposed to convert a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "coloring" of indices to an array of ISs, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> each having the indices with the same color and the subcomm >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that supports that color. It is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> largely untested, though. You could try using it and give us >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> feedback on any problems you encounter. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dmitry. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 6:06 AM, Hui Zhang >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> About PCGASMSetLocalSubdomains(), in the case of one subdomain >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supported by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> multiple processors, shall I always create the arguments >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'is[s]' and 'is_local[s]' >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in a subcommunicator consisting of processors supporting the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> subdomain 's'? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The source code of PCGASMCreateSubdomains2D() seemingly does >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hui >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120515/c4671240/attachment-0001.htm>

[petsc-users] PCGASMSetLocalSubdomains

roblem with GASM. But when I use >>>>>>>>>> run my program >>>>>>>>>> with only one proc. so that it supports both of the two subdomains, >>>>>>>>>> the iteration >>>>>>>>>> number is different from the first case and is much larger. On the >>>>>>>>>> other hand >>>>>>>>>> ASM has no such problem. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Are the solutions the same? >>>>>>>>>> What problem are you solving? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Yes, the solutions are the same. That's why ASM gives the same >>>>>>>>> results with one or >>>>>>>>> two processors. But GASM did not. >>>>>>>>> Sorry, I wasn't clear: ASM and GASM produced different solutions in >>>>>>>>> the case of two domains per processor? >>>>>>>>> I'm solving the Helmholtz equation. Maybe >>>>>>>>> I can prepare a simpler example to show this difference. >>>>>>>>> That would be helpful. >>>>>>>>> Thanks. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Dmitry. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Dmitry. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Feb 15, 2012, at 6:46 PM, Dmitry Karpeev wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> You should be able to. >>>>>>>>>>> This behavior is the same as in PCASM, >>>>>>>>>>> except in GASM the matrices live on subcommunicators. >>>>>>>>>>> I am in transit right now, but I can take a closer look in Friday. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Dmitry >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 15, 2012, at 8:07, Hui Zhang >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 15, 2012, at 11:19 AM, Hui Zhang wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Dmitry, >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> thanks a lot! Currently, I'm not using ISColoring. Just comes >>>>>>>>>>>>> another question >>>>>>>>>>>>> on PCGASMSetModifySubMatrices(). The user provided function has >>>>>>>>>>>>> the prototype >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> func (PC pc,PetscInt nsub,IS *row,IS *col,Mat *submat,void >>>>>>>>>>>>> *ctx); >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I think the coloumns from the parameter 'col' are always the same >>>>>>>>>>>>> as the rows >>>>>>>>>>>>> from the parameter 'row'. Because PCGASMSetLocalSubdomains() only >>>>>>>>>>>>> accepts >>>>>>>>>>>>> index sets but not rows and columns. Has I misunderstood >>>>>>>>>>>>> something? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> As I tested, the row and col are always the same. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I have a new question. Am I allowed to SetLocalToGlobalMapping() >>>>>>>>>>>> for the submat's >>>>>>>>>>>> in the above func()? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>> Hui >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hui >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 11, 2012, at 3:36 PM, Dmitry Karpeev wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, that's right. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> There is no good way to help the user assemble the subdomains at >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the moment beyond the 2D stuff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is expected that they are generated from mesh subdomains. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Each IS does carry the subdomains subcomm. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> There is ISColoringToList() that is supposed to convert a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "coloring" of indices to an array of ISs, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> each having the indices with the same color and the subcomm that >>>>>>>>>>>>>> supports that color. It is >>>>>>>>>>>>>> largely untested, though. You could try using it and give us >>>>>>>>>>>>>> feedback on any problems you encounter. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dmitry. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 6:06 AM, Hui Zhang >>>>>>>>>>>>> hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> About PCGASMSetLocalSubdomains(), in the case of one subdomain >>>>>>>>>>>>>> supported by >>>>>>>>>>>>>> multiple processors, shall I always create the arguments 'is[s]' >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and 'is_local[s]' >>>>>>>>>>>>>> in a subcommunicator consisting of processors supporting the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> subdomain 's'? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The source code of PCGASMCreateSubdomains2D() seemingly does so. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hui >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > > -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120515/3cf175e4/attachment-0001.htm>

[petsc-users] Fwd: PCGASMSetLocalSubdomains

;>>>>>> other hand >>>>>>>>>> ASM has no such problem. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Are the solutions the same? >>>>>>>>>> What problem are you solving? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Yes, the solutions are the same. That's why ASM gives the same >>>>>>>>> results with one or >>>>>>>>> two processors. But GASM did not. >>>>>>>>> Sorry, I wasn't clear: ASM and GASM produced different solutions in >>>>>>>>> the case of two domains per processor? >>>>>>>>> I'm solving the Helmholtz equation. Maybe >>>>>>>>> I can prepare a simpler example to show this difference. >>>>>>>>> That would be helpful. >>>>>>>>> Thanks. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Dmitry. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Dmitry. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Feb 15, 2012, at 6:46 PM, Dmitry Karpeev wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> You should be able to. >>>>>>>>>>> This behavior is the same as in PCASM, >>>>>>>>>>> except in GASM the matrices live on subcommunicators. >>>>>>>>>>> I am in transit right now, but I can take a closer look in Friday. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Dmitry >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 15, 2012, at 8:07, Hui Zhang >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 15, 2012, at 11:19 AM, Hui Zhang wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Dmitry, >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> thanks a lot! Currently, I'm not using ISColoring. Just comes >>>>>>>>>>>>> another question >>>>>>>>>>>>> on PCGASMSetModifySubMatrices(). The user provided function has >>>>>>>>>>>>> the prototype >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> func (PC pc,PetscInt nsub,IS *row,IS *col,Mat *submat,void >>>>>>>>>>>>> *ctx); >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I think the coloumns from the parameter 'col' are always the same >>>>>>>>>>>>> as the rows >>>>>>>>>>>>> from the parameter 'row'. Because PCGASMSetLocalSubdomains() only >>>>>>>>>>>>> accepts >>>>>>>>>>>>> index sets but not rows and columns. Has I misunderstood >>>>>>>>>>>>> something? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> As I tested, the row and col are always the same. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I have a new question. Am I allowed to SetLocalToGlobalMapping() >>>>>>>>>>>> for the submat's >>>>>>>>>>>> in the above func()? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>> Hui >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hui >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 11, 2012, at 3:36 PM, Dmitry Karpeev wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, that's right. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> There is no good way to help the user assemble the subdomains at >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the moment beyond the 2D stuff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is expected that they are generated from mesh subdomains. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Each IS does carry the subdomains subcomm. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> There is ISColoringToList() that is supposed to convert a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "coloring" of indices to an array of ISs, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> each having the indices with the same color and the subcomm that >>>>>>>>>>>>>> supports that color. It is >>>>>>>>>>>>>> largely untested, though. You could try using it and give us >>>>>>>>>>>>>> feedback on any problems you encounter. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dmitry. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 6:06 AM, Hui Zhang >>>>>>>>>>>>> hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> About PCGASMSetLocalSubdomains(), in the case of one subdomain >>>>>>>>>>>>>> supported by >>>>>>>>>>>>>> multiple processors, shall I always create the arguments 'is[s]' >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and 'is_local[s]' >>>>>>>>>>>>>> in a subcommunicator consisting of processors supporting the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> subdomain 's'? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The source code of PCGASMCreateSubdomains2D() seemingly does so. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hui >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120515/4b486dcf/attachment-0001.htm>

[petsc-users] Divergence when using Line Search

-snes_linesearch_type > cp (critical point) that might be useful. > -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120515/485cc81e/attachment.htm>

[petsc-users] PCGASMSetLocalSubdomains

gt;>>>>> Dmitry. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Feb 15, 2012, at 6:46 PM, Dmitry Karpeev wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You should be able to. >>>>>>>>> This behavior is the same as in PCASM, >>>>>>>>> except in GASM the matrices live on subcommunicators. >>>>>>>>> I am in transit right now, but I can take a closer look in Friday. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Dmitry >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Feb 15, 2012, at 8:07, Hui Zhang >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Feb 15, 2012, at 11:19 AM, Hui Zhang wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi Dmitry, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> thanks a lot! Currently, I'm not using ISColoring. Just comes >>>>>>>>>>> another question >>>>>>>>>>> on PCGASMSetModifySubMatrices(). The user provided function has the >>>>>>>>>>> prototype >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> func (PC pc,PetscInt nsub,IS *row,IS *col,Mat *submat,void >>>>>>>>>>> *ctx); >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I think the coloumns from the parameter 'col' are always the same >>>>>>>>>>> as the rows >>>>>>>>>>> from the parameter 'row'. Because PCGASMSetLocalSubdomains() only >>>>>>>>>>> accepts >>>>>>>>>>> index sets but not rows and columns. Has I misunderstood something? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> As I tested, the row and col are always the same. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I have a new question. Am I allowed to SetLocalToGlobalMapping() for >>>>>>>>>> the submat's >>>>>>>>>> in the above func()? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> thanks, >>>>>>>>>> Hui >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> thanks, >>>>>>>>>>> Hui >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 11, 2012, at 3:36 PM, Dmitry Karpeev wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, that's right. >>>>>>>>>>>> There is no good way to help the user assemble the subdomains at >>>>>>>>>>>> the moment beyond the 2D stuff. >>>>>>>>>>>> It is expected that they are generated from mesh subdomains. >>>>>>>>>>>> Each IS does carry the subdomains subcomm. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> There is ISColoringToList() that is supposed to convert a >>>>>>>>>>>> "coloring" of indices to an array of ISs, >>>>>>>>>>>> each having the indices with the same color and the subcomm that >>>>>>>>>>>> supports that color. It is >>>>>>>>>>>> largely untested, though. You could try using it and give us >>>>>>>>>>>> feedback on any problems you encounter. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Dmitry. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 6:06 AM, Hui Zhang >>>>>>>>>>> hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> About PCGASMSetLocalSubdomains(), in the case of one subdomain >>>>>>>>>>>> supported by >>>>>>>>>>>> multiple processors, shall I always create the arguments 'is[s]' >>>>>>>>>>>> and 'is_local[s]' >>>>>>>>>>>> in a subcommunicator consisting of processors supporting the >>>>>>>>>>>> subdomain 's'? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> The source code of PCGASMCreateSubdomains2D() seemingly does so. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>> Hui >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> > > -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120515/96b4b7c2/attachment-0001.htm>

[petsc-users] Divergence when using Line Search

ng, but there is -snes_linesearch_type >> cp (critical point) that might be useful. >> > > -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120515/d99408ed/attachment.htm>

[petsc-users] Divergence when using Line Search

On May 15, 2012, at 4:32 PM, Avery Bingham wrote: > I have also seen this behavior, and I think this might be related to the > scaling of the variables in the nonlinear system. I am using PETSc through > an application of MOOSE which allows for scaling of the variables. This > scaling reduce

[petsc-users] Linesearch algorithm

ly post-release. - Peter -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120515/29368f73/attachment.htm>

[petsc-users] Divergence when using Line Search

e is -snes_linesearch_type cp (critical point) that might be useful. -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120515/e3fbec73/attachment.htm>

[petsc-users] Linesearch algorithm

ake place before a steady state can be reached. -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120515/431b6427/attachment-0001.htm>

[petsc-users] Divergence when using Line Search

cubic model can not. Please help me what conditions may leads the above issue in line search. Regards, BehZad* -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120515/7690c6e3/attachment.htm>

[petsc-users] Linesearch algorithm

ts.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120515/5b4ca762/attachment.htm>

[petsc-users] Modifying the structure of a matrix.

s from the local range of one processor? that processor wouldn't be > utilized unless you redistribute the matrix) > > What sizes and method are we talking about? Usually additional (compact) > basis functions only make sense to add to one of a small number of processes. > > -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120515/ab773184/attachment-0001.htm>

[petsc-users] Modifying the structure of a matrix.

u need to manually determine the local row >>> distribution after you do that. (for example, say you completely remove >>> all the values from the local range of one processor? that processor >>> wouldn't be utilized unless you redistribute the matrix) >>>

[petsc-users] Modifying the structure of a matrix.

sor? that > > > processor wouldn't be utilized unless you redistribute the matrix) > > What sizes and method are we talking about? Usually additional > > (compact) basis functions only make sense to add to one of a small > > number of processes. -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120515/1d82f08e/attachment.htm>

[petsc-users] Modifying the structure of a matrix.

t;http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120515/9920d6cf/attachment.htm>

[petsc-users] Modifying the structure of a matrix.

redistribute the matrix) >> > > What sizes and method are we talking about? Usually additional (compact) > basis functions only make sense to add to one of a small number of > processes. > > > > -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120515/2455201f/attachment.htm>

[petsc-users] How to set up -mat_mumps_icntl13 1 in the code?

Hi Barry. On Mon, 14 May 2012, Barry Smith wrote: >src/snes/examples/tutorials/ex22.c is an example of how one can set > options in the program and then have the command line options override them. Thanks! I am looking at that right now. > PetscInitialize(&argc,&argv,PETSC_NULL,help); > >

[petsc-users] Modifying the structure of a matrix.

nctions only make sense to add to one of a small number of processes. -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120515/aeab303a/attachment.htm>

[petsc-users] Using direct solvers in parallel

On 5/15/12 9:25 AM, Thomas Witkowski wrote: > I made some comparisons of using umfpack, superlu, superlu_dist and > mumps to solve systems with sparse matrices arising from finite > element method. The size of the matrices range from around 5 to > more than 3 million unknowns. I used 1, 2, 4

[petsc-users] Fwd: PCGASMSetLocalSubdomains

ich are easy enough to construct on your own. PCGASM doesn't have the individual scatters, so that's of even less help for you. Dmitry. -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120515/a4d73fc8/attachment-0001.htm>

[petsc-users] 3D Poisson Solver with a Periodic Boundary Condition in One Direction?

Alan, Sorry, we don't have exactly that example. But you can start with src/ksp/ksp/examples/tutorials/ex45.c change the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th argument to DMDA_BOUNDARY_PERIODIC then in ComputeMatrix() remove the appropriate values from if (i==0 || j==0 || k==0 || i==mx-1 || j==my-1 || k==mz-1)

[petsc-users] PCGASMSetLocalSubdomains

rices. Numerical >>>>>>>>>>> tests are with >>>>>>>>>>> each subdomain supported only by one subdomain. There are no >>>>>>>>>>> problems when >>>>>>>>>>> I did not modify submatrices. But when I modify submatrices, >>>>>>>>>>> there are problems >>>>>>>>>>> with GASM but no problems with ASM. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> For example, I use two subdomains. In the first case each >>>>>>>>>>> subdomain is supported by >>>>>>>>>>> one processor and there seems no problem with GASM. But when I >>>>>>>>>>> use run my program >>>>>>>>>>> with only one proc. so that it supports both of the two >>>>>>>>>>> subdomains, the iteration >>>>>>>>>>> number is different from the first case and is much larger. On >>>>>>>>>>> the other hand >>>>>>>>>>> ASM has no such problem. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Are the solutions the same? >>>>>>>>>> What problem are you solving? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Yes, the solutions are the same. That's why ASM gives the same >>>>>>>>>> results with one or >>>>>>>>>> two processors. But GASM did not. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Sorry, I wasn't clear: ASM and GASM produced different solutions >>>>>>>>> in the case of two domains per processor? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I'm solving the Helmholtz equation. Maybe >>>>>>>>>> I can prepare a simpler example to show this difference. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> That would be helpful. >>>>>>>>> Thanks. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Dmitry. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Dmitry. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 15, 2012, at 6:46 PM, Dmitry Karpeev wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> You should be able to. >>>>>>>>>>> This behavior is the same as in PCASM, >>>>>>>>>>> except in GASM the matrices live on subcommunicators. >>>>>>>>>>> I am in transit right now, but I can take a closer look in >>>>>>>>>>> Friday. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Dmitry >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 15, 2012, at 8:07, Hui Zhang >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 15, 2012, at 11:19 AM, Hui Zhang wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi Dmitry, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> thanks a lot! Currently, I'm not using ISColoring. Just comes >>>>>>>>>>> another question >>>>>>>>>>> on PCGASMSetModifySubMatrices(). The user provided function has >>>>>>>>>>> the prototype >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> func (PC pc,PetscInt nsub,IS *row,IS *col,Mat *submat,void >>>>>>>>>>> *ctx); >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I think the coloumns from the parameter 'col' are always the >>>>>>>>>>> same as the rows >>>>>>>>>>> from the parameter 'row'. Because PCGASMSetLocalSubdomains() >>>>>>>>>>> only accepts >>>>>>>>>>> index sets but not rows and columns. Has I misunderstood >>>>>>>>>>> something? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> As I tested, the row and col are always the same. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I have a new question. Am I allowed to SetLocalToGlobalMapping() >>>>>>>>>>> for the submat's >>>>>>>>>>> in the above func()? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> thanks, >>>>>>>>>>> Hui >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> thanks, >>>>>>>>>>> Hui >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 11, 2012, at 3:36 PM, Dmitry Karpeev wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Yes, that's right. >>>>>>>>>>> There is no good way to help the user assemble the subdomains at >>>>>>>>>>> the moment beyond the 2D stuff. >>>>>>>>>>> It is expected that they are generated from mesh subdomains. >>>>>>>>>>> Each IS does carry the subdomains subcomm. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> There is ISColoringToList() that is supposed to convert a >>>>>>>>>>> "coloring" of indices to an array of ISs, >>>>>>>>>>> each having the indices with the same color and the subcomm that >>>>>>>>>>> supports that color. It is >>>>>>>>>>> largely untested, though. You could try using it and give us >>>>>>>>>>> feedback on any problems you encounter. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Dmitry. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 6:06 AM, Hui Zhang <>>>>>>>>>> hotmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>> mike.hui.zhang at hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> About PCGASMSetLocalSubdomains(), in the case of one subdomain >>>>>>>>>>>> supported by >>>>>>>>>>>> multiple processors, shall I always create the arguments >>>>>>>>>>>> 'is[s]' and 'is_local[s]' >>>>>>>>>>>> in a subcommunicator consisting of processors supporting the >>>>>>>>>>>> subdomain 's'? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> The source code of PCGASMCreateSubdomains2D() seemingly does so. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>> Hui >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > > -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120515/65dae8c7/attachment-0001.htm>

[petsc-users] PCGASMSetLocalSubdomains

;>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I think the coloumns from the parameter 'col' are always the same as >>>>>>>>> the rows >>>>>>>>> from the parameter 'row'. Because PCGASMSetLocalSubdomains() only >>>>>>>>> accepts >>>>>>>>> index sets but not rows and columns. Has I misunderstood something? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> As I tested, the row and col are always the same. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I have a new question. Am I allowed to SetLocalToGlobalMapping() for >>>>>>>> the submat's >>>>>>>> in the above func()? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> thanks, >>>>>>>> Hui >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> thanks, >>>>>>>>> Hui >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Feb 11, 2012, at 3:36 PM, Dmitry Karpeev wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Yes, that's right. >>>>>>>>>> There is no good way to help the user assemble the subdomains at the >>>>>>>>>> moment beyond the 2D stuff. >>>>>>>>>> It is expected that they are generated from mesh subdomains. >>>>>>>>>> Each IS does carry the subdomains subcomm. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> There is ISColoringToList() that is supposed to convert a "coloring" >>>>>>>>>> of indices to an array of ISs, >>>>>>>>>> each having the indices with the same color and the subcomm that >>>>>>>>>> supports that color. It is >>>>>>>>>> largely untested, though. You could try using it and give us >>>>>>>>>> feedback on any problems you encounter. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Dmitry. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 6:06 AM, Hui Zhang >>>>>>>>> hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> About PCGASMSetLocalSubdomains(), in the case of one subdomain >>>>>>>>>> supported by >>>>>>>>>> multiple processors, shall I always create the arguments 'is[s]' and >>>>>>>>>> 'is_local[s]' >>>>>>>>>> in a subcommunicator consisting of processors supporting the >>>>>>>>>> subdomain 's'? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The source code of PCGASMCreateSubdomains2D() seemingly does so. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>> Hui >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > > > -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120515/b2e19cda/attachment.htm>

[petsc-users] Fwd: PCGASMSetLocalSubdomains

he coarse basis functions are a partition of unity? -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120515/e0e347f9/attachment.htm>

[petsc-users] Fwd: PCGASMSetLocalSubdomains

ct the subdomain problems from PC(G)ASM. -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120515/1c42faa8/attachment.htm>

[petsc-users] PCGASMSetLocalSubdomains

t;>>>> results with one or >>>>>>>> two processors. But GASM did not. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sorry, I wasn't clear: ASM and GASM produced different solutions in >>>>>>> the case of two domains per processor? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'm solving the Helmholtz equation. Maybe >>>>>>>> I can prepare a simpler example to show this difference. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> That would be helpful. >>>>>>> Thanks. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Dmitry. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Dmitry. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Feb 15, 2012, at 6:46 PM, Dmitry Karpeev wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You should be able to. >>>>>>>>> This behavior is the same as in PCASM, >>>>>>>>> except in GASM the matrices live on subcommunicators. >>>>>>>>> I am in transit right now, but I can take a closer look in Friday. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Dmitry >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Feb 15, 2012, at 8:07, Hui Zhang >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Feb 15, 2012, at 11:19 AM, Hui Zhang wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi Dmitry, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> thanks a lot! Currently, I'm not using ISColoring. Just comes >>>>>>>>> another question >>>>>>>>> on PCGASMSetModifySubMatrices(). The user provided function has >>>>>>>>> the prototype >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> func (PC pc,PetscInt nsub,IS *row,IS *col,Mat *submat,void *ctx); >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I think the coloumns from the parameter 'col' are always the same as >>>>>>>>> the rows >>>>>>>>> from the parameter 'row'. Because PCGASMSetLocalSubdomains() only >>>>>>>>> accepts >>>>>>>>> index sets but not rows and columns. Has I misunderstood something? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> As I tested, the row and col are always the same. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I have a new question. Am I allowed to SetLocalToGlobalMapping() >>>>>>>>> for the submat's >>>>>>>>> in the above func()? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> thanks, >>>>>>>>> Hui >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> thanks, >>>>>>>>> Hui >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Feb 11, 2012, at 3:36 PM, Dmitry Karpeev wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Yes, that's right. >>>>>>>>> There is no good way to help the user assemble the subdomains at >>>>>>>>> the moment beyond the 2D stuff. >>>>>>>>> It is expected that they are generated from mesh subdomains. >>>>>>>>> Each IS does carry the subdomains subcomm. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> There is ISColoringToList() that is supposed to convert a >>>>>>>>> "coloring" of indices to an array of ISs, >>>>>>>>> each having the indices with the same color and the subcomm that >>>>>>>>> supports that color. It is >>>>>>>>> largely untested, though. You could try using it and give us >>>>>>>>> feedback on any problems you encounter. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Dmitry. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 6:06 AM, Hui Zhang <>>>>>>>> hotmail.com> >>>>>>>>> mike.hui.zhang at hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> About PCGASMSetLocalSubdomains(), in the case of one subdomain >>>>>>>>>> supported by >>>>>>>>>> multiple processors, shall I always create the arguments 'is[s]' >>>>>>>>>> and 'is_local[s]' >>>>>>>>>> in a subcommunicator consisting of processors supporting the >>>>>>>>>> subdomain 's'? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The source code of PCGASMCreateSubdomains2D() seemingly does so. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>> Hui >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> > > -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120515/a59a6a8c/attachment.htm>

[petsc-users] PCGASMSetLocalSubdomains

) which is a basic implementation of a two-level DD method of this type. -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120515/738ee3bd/attachment.htm>

[petsc-users] Using direct solvers in parallel

Am 15.05.2012 10:00, schrieb Dave May: > Ah okay. Thanks for the timings. > > Have you monitored the CPU usage when you using umfpack? > On my machine, it's definitely not running on a single process, > so I wouldn't consider it a sequential solver. > > > Yes, the CPU usage is 100% and not more. If

[petsc-users] Using direct solvers in parallel

Ah okay. Thanks for the timings. Have you monitored the CPU usage when you using umfpack? On my machine, it's definitely not running on a single process, so I wouldn't consider it a sequential solver. On 15 May 2012 09:54, Thomas Witkowski wrote: > Am 15.05.2012 09:36, schrieb Dave May: > >>

[petsc-users] Using direct solvers in parallel

There is another sparse direct solver that PETSc supports: PaStix. You can try it by --download-pastix. Xiangdong On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 5:34 AM, Anton Popov wrote: > On 5/15/12 9:25 AM, Thomas Witkowski wrote: >> >> I made some comparisons of using umfpack, superlu, superlu_dist and mumps >>

[petsc-users] Linesearch algorithm

... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120515/34b087a2/attachment.htm>

[petsc-users] Using direct solvers in parallel

Am 15.05.2012 09:36, schrieb Dave May: > I have seem similar behaviour comparing umfpack and superlu_dist, > however the difference wasn't enormous, possibly umfpack was a factor > of 1.2-1.4 times faster on 1 - 4 cores. > What sort of time differences are you observing? Can you post the > numbers

[petsc-users] Using direct solvers in parallel

2, 4, 8 and 16 nodes to make the benchmark. Now, I >>> wonder that in all cases the sequential umfpack was the fastest one. So >>> even >>> with 16 cores, superlu_dist and mumps are slower. Can anybody of you >>> confirm >>> this observation? Are there any other parallel direct solvers around >>> which >>> are more efficient? >>> >>> Thomas >>> >> > -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120515/243d1f4a/attachment.htm>

[petsc-users] Using direct solvers in parallel

I have seem similar behaviour comparing umfpack and superlu_dist, however the difference wasn't enormous, possibly umfpack was a factor of 1.2-1.4 times faster on 1 - 4 cores. What sort of time differences are you observing? Can you post the numbers somewhere? However, umpack will not work on a di

[petsc-users] Using direct solvers in parallel

I made some comparisons of using umfpack, superlu, superlu_dist and mumps to solve systems with sparse matrices arising from finite element method. The size of the matrices range from around 5 to more than 3 million unknowns. I used 1, 2, 4, 8 and 16 nodes to make the benchmark. Now, I wond

[petsc-users] How to set up -mat_mumps_icntl13 1 in the code?

On May 15, 2012, at 5:30 AM, Giacomo Mulas wrote: > Hi Barry. > > On Mon, 14 May 2012, Barry Smith wrote: > >> src/snes/examples/tutorials/ex22.c is an example of how one can set >> options in the program and then have the command line options override them. > > Thanks! I am looking at that

[petsc-users] Linesearch algorithm

he transient or steady problem. -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120515/cd451057/attachment.htm>

[petsc-users] PCGASMSetLocalSubdomains

gt;>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Feb 15, 2012, at 11:19 AM, Hui Zhang wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Dmitry, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> thanks a lot! Currently, I'm not using ISColoring. Just comes >>>>>>> another question >>>>>>> on PCGASMSetModifySubMatrices(). The user provided function has the >>>>>>> prototype >>>>>>> >>>>>>> func (PC pc,PetscInt nsub,IS *row,IS *col,Mat *submat,void *ctx); >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I think the coloumns from the parameter 'col' are always the same as >>>>>>> the rows >>>>>>> from the parameter 'row'. Because PCGASMSetLocalSubdomains() only >>>>>>> accepts >>>>>>> index sets but not rows and columns. Has I misunderstood something? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As I tested, the row and col are always the same. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I have a new question. Am I allowed to SetLocalToGlobalMapping() for >>>>>>> the submat's >>>>>>> in the above func()? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> thanks, >>>>>>> Hui >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> thanks, >>>>>>> Hui >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Feb 11, 2012, at 3:36 PM, Dmitry Karpeev wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yes, that's right. >>>>>>> There is no good way to help the user assemble the subdomains at the >>>>>>> moment beyond the 2D stuff. >>>>>>> It is expected that they are generated from mesh subdomains. >>>>>>> Each IS does carry the subdomains subcomm. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There is ISColoringToList() that is supposed to convert a "coloring" >>>>>>> of indices to an array of ISs, >>>>>>> each having the indices with the same color and the subcomm that >>>>>>> supports that color. It is >>>>>>> largely untested, though. You could try using it and give us >>>>>>> feedback on any problems you encounter. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Dmitry. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 6:06 AM, Hui Zhang <>>>>>> hotmail.com> >>>>>>> mike.hui.zhang at hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> About PCGASMSetLocalSubdomains(), in the case of one subdomain >>>>>>>> supported by >>>>>>>> multiple processors, shall I always create the arguments 'is[s]' >>>>>>>> and 'is_local[s]' >>>>>>>> in a subcommunicator consisting of processors supporting the >>>>>>>> subdomain 's'? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The source code of PCGASMCreateSubdomains2D() seemingly does so. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>> Hui >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > > > > -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120515/82de5e39/attachment-0001.htm>

[petsc-users] Modifying the structure of a matrix.

ent was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120515/a1d9acc1/attachment.htm>