On Thu, 21 Mar 2019, Maahi Talukder via petsc-users wrote:
> Thank you for your reply.
>
> So do I need to set the value of PETSC_ARCH as needed in .bashrc as I did
> in case of PETSC_DIR ?
You can specify PETSC_ARCH as an option to make. You can have a default value
set in .bashrc - and
PETSc uses the concept of PETSC_ARCH to enable multiple in-place
builds.
So you can have a debug build with PETSC_ARCH=arch-debug, and a
optimized build with PETSC_ARCH=arch-opt etc.
And if you are using a petsc formatted makefile with your code - you
can switch between these builds by just
Justin Chang via petsc-users writes:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm writing a petsc4py routine to manually create nested fieldsplits using
> index sets, and it looks like whenever I move onto the next level of splits
> I need to rescale the IS's.
>
> From the PCFieldSplitSetDefault() routine, it looks like
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 1:57 PM Derek Gaston via petsc-users
mailto:petsc-users@mcs.anl.gov>> wrote:
It sounds like you already tracked this down... but for completeness here is
what track-origins gives:
==262923== Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s)
==262923==at
Il giorno mer 20 mar 2019 alle ore 23:40 Derek Gaston via petsc-users <
petsc-users@mcs.anl.gov> ha scritto:
> Trying to track down some memory corruption I'm seeing on larger scale
> runs (3.5B+ unknowns).
>
Uhm are you using 32bit indices? is it possible there's integer
overflow somewhere?
Ok - cherrypicked and pushed to maint.
Satish
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019, Zhang, Junchao via petsc-users wrote:
> Yes, it does. It is a bug.
> --Junchao Zhang
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 11:16 AM Balay, Satish
> mailto:ba...@mcs.anl.gov>> wrote:
> Does maint also need this fix?
>
> Satish
>
>
Yes, it does. It is a bug.
--Junchao Zhang
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 11:16 AM Balay, Satish
mailto:ba...@mcs.anl.gov>> wrote:
Does maint also need this fix?
Satish
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019, Stefano Zampini via petsc-users wrote:
> Derek
>
> I have fixed the optimized plan few weeks ago
>
>
Does maint also need this fix?
Satish
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019, Stefano Zampini via petsc-users wrote:
> Derek
>
> I have fixed the optimized plan few weeks ago
>
> https://bitbucket.org/petsc/petsc/commits/c3caad8634d376283f7053f3b388606b45b3122c
>
> Maybe this will fix your problem too?
>
>
Thanks to Stefano for fixing this bug. His fix is easy to apply (two-line
change) and therefore should be tried first.
--Junchao Zhang
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 3:02 AM Stefano Zampini
mailto:stefano.zamp...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Derek
I have fixed the optimized plan few weeks ago
Thanks for all the reply.
The model I simulated is a thermal model that contains multiple physical
fields(eg. temperature, pressure, velocity). In PDEs, these variables are
preceded by some physical parameters, which in turn are functions of these
variables(eg. density is a function of pressure
On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 1:18 PM Smith, Barry F. via petsc-users <
petsc-users@mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
>
>
> > On Mar 20, 2019, at 5:52 AM, Yingjie Wu via petsc-users <
> petsc-users@mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
> >
> > Dear PETSc developers:
> > Hi,
> > Recently, I used PETSc to solve a non-linear PDEs for
11 matches
Mail list logo
