Hi all,
I created a DMComposite using two DMDAs (representing the x and y
components of velocity in a 2-D staggered cartesian grid used for CFD
simulations). DMCompositeGetISLocalToGlobalMappings gives me the global
indices of the elements and ghost cells, which I can use to set up a matrix
that o
On Apr 28, 2014, at 3:23 PM, Xiangdong wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> When I run snes program,
what SNES program”?
> it outputs "SNES Function norm 1.23456789e+10". It seems that this norm is
> different from residue norm (even if solving F(x)=0)
Please send the full ou
On Apr 28, 2014, at 7:39 PM, Abhyankar, Shrirang G. wrote:
> Zero out the sixth row, set A[5][5]= 1.0 and b[5]=3.14.
You can use, for example, MatZeroRows() to zero that row if you have already
assembled the matrix.
Barry
>
> On Apr 28, 2014, at 7:00 PM, "丁老师" wrote:
>
>> Dear group:
Zero out the sixth row, set A[5][5]= 1.0 and b[5]=3.14.
On Apr 28, 2014, at 7:00 PM, "丁老师"
mailto:ztdepya...@163.com>> wrote:
Dear group:
I have assembled the coefficients of A and b. My computation alogrithm need
to specify a component of x to be a constant value. for example x[5]=3.14;
th
Dear group:
I have assembled the coefficients of A and b. My computation alogrithm need
to specify a component of x to be a constant value. for example x[5]=3.14;
then how to resolve this problem.
Regards
Hello everyone,
When I run snes program, it outputs "SNES Function norm 1.23456789e+10". It
seems that this norm is different from residue norm (even if solving
F(x)=0) and also differ from norm of the Jacobian. What is the definition
of this "SNES Function Norm"?
Thank you.
Best,
Xiangdong
Hello;
I put all those commands. It does not work with
-ksp_monitor_singular_value and here is the output:
0 KSP preconditioned resid norm 2.622210477042e+04 true resid norm
1.860478790525e+07 ||r(i)||/||b|| 1.e+00
0 KSP Residual norm 2.622210477042e+04 % max 1.e+0
Please run with the additional options -ksp_max_it 500 -ksp_gmres_restart 500
-ksp_monitor_true_residual -ksp_monitor_singular_value and send back all the
output (that would include the 500 residual norms as it tries to converge.)
Barry
On Apr 28, 2014, at 1:21 PM, Foad Hassaninejadfarahan
Hello Again;
I used -ksp_rtol 1.e-12 and it took way way longer to get the result
for one iteration and it did not converge:
Linear solve did not converge due to DIVERGED_ITS iterations 1
KSP Object: 8 MPI processes
type: gmres
GMRES: restart=300, using Classical (unmodified) Gram-S
On Apr 28, 2014, at 12:59 PM, Barry Smith wrote:
>
> First try a much tighter tolerance on the linear solver. Use -ksp_rtol 1.e-12
>
> I don’t fully understand. Is the coupled system nonlinear? Are you solving a
> nonlinear system, how are you doing that since you seem to be only solving a
El 28/04/2014, a las 19:19, Steve Ndengue escribió:
> Dear all,
>
> Is it possible to ask that only the "nev" selected from **EPSSETDimensions**
> be printed when using the Lapack method?
> Would the code work faster if only these values were to be computed instead
> of all as it does by defau
Dear all,
Is it possible to ask that only the "nev" selected from
**EPSSETDimensions** be printed when using the Lapack method?
Would the code work faster if only these values were to be computed
instead of all as it does by default?
Sincerely,
--
Steve
El 28/04/2014, a las 18:56, Steve Ndengue escribió:
> Dear all,
>
> How can one increase the number of iterations using either the Krylov,
> Arnoldi or Lanczos method?
> I think that more iterations (sometimes) lead to convergence of more
> eigenvalues? Or is there a way to play with these to
Dear all,
How can one increase the number of iterations using either the Krylov,
Arnoldi or Lanczos method?
I think that more iterations (sometimes) lead to convergence of more
eigenvalues? Or is there a way to play with these to get to convergence?
Sincerely,
--
Steve
It will take a very long time
On Apr 28, 2014, at 9:14 AM, Norihiro Watanabe wrote:
> I cannot surely say my Jacobian for this particular problem is correct, as I
> have not checked it. For a smaller problem, I've already checked its
> correctness using -snes_type test or -snes_compare_expl
I cannot surely say my Jacobian for this particular problem is correct, as
I have not checked it. For a smaller problem, I've already checked its
correctness using -snes_type test or -snes_compare_explicit (but linear
solve and nonlinear solve with FD one need a few more iterations than with
my Jac
Thanks Barry,
Works now.
I missed that from reading the doc on the internet. Will try to remember that
one.
Danny.
-Original Message-
From: Barry Smith [mailto:bsm...@mcs.anl.gov]
Sent: maandag 28 april 2014 13:57
To: Danny Lathouwers - TNW
Cc: petsc-users@mcs.anl.gov
Subject: Re: [petsc
call MatGetSize(petsc_matrix%A_PetSC,m,n)
call MatMatMult(A,B,MAT_INITIAL_MATRIX,PETSC_DEFAULT_DOUBLE_PRECISION,C)
missing the final ierr argument.
On Apr 28, 2014, at 4:26 AM, Danny Lathouwers - TNW
wrote:
> Dear users,
>
> I encountered some basic problems when using PETSc with Fortran90
Dear users,
I encountered some basic problems when using PETSc with Fortran90. To
illustrate the problem easiest I made a simple problem (attached).
There is a petsc.f90 that contains a module with all PETSc specific coding
(initializations, etc).
I have a main with some easy declarations and ca
19 matches
Mail list logo
