Martin, > > This was written when PETSc 2.2 was current, so it may have changed in > > the meantime. If you think the default value should be changed, would > > you mind removing this hunk of documentation? > > Now I looked into the function once again and found that we fixed the > PETSc matrix structure with > MatSetOption (matrix, MAT_NO_NEW_NONZERO_LOCATIONS); > in the wrong place. Now the problem is fixed. I then decided to set the > default value true because that is the value we also use for the PETSc > parallel matrix. However, it would be good if someone tested these two > options on the PETSc 3.0 in order to find out whether this is really a > good idea.
I haven't used PETSc in years, so I'm afraid I'm not in much of an educated position to try this. That said, if you think this is the right thing to do then I think we can trust you :-) Did you adjust the documentation in this regard? Best W. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wolfgang Bangerth email: [email protected] www: http://www.math.tamu.edu/~bangerth/ _______________________________________________ dealii mailing list http://poisson.dealii.org/mailman/listinfo/dealii
