On 4 October 2011 18:13, Anders Logg <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 04, 2011 at 04:17:01PM +0100, Garth N. Wells wrote: > > On 4 October 2011 12:24, Anders Logg <[email protected]> wrote: > > > SystemAssembler does not support subdomains. It is even silently > > > ignoring all other integrals than number 0. > > > > > > This is one of the remaining bugs for 1.0-beta2. I can try to fix it > > > but would like some input on what shape the SystemAssembler is > > > currently in. I haven't touched it that much before since it looks > > > like a bit of code duplication to me. In particular, is it necessary > > > to keep both functions cell_wise_assembly and facet_wise_assembly? > > > > > > > It would require some performance testing to decide. I expect that, > > for performance reasons, both are required. > > I'm getting very strange results. Here are results for assembling > Poisson matrix + vector on a 32 x 32 x 32 unit cube: > > Regular assembler: 0.658 s > System assembler: 9.08 s (cell-wise) > System assembler: 202 s (facet-wise) > > Is this expected? > > What are the arguments against ditching SystemAssembler (for less code > duplication) and adding functionality for symmetric application of BCs > on the linear algebra level? > >
Earlier system_assemble of A and b was faster than assemble of A and b. Something strange must have happened. SystemAssemble enforce symmetric BC elementwise which is much faster than doing it on linear algebra level. Kent > -- > Anders > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dolfin > Post to : [email protected] > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dolfin > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dolfin Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dolfin More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
