On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 4:09 PM, Serbulent UNSAL <[email protected]> wrote:
> Thanks for help. > > Using LinearPCGSolver gives some more speed but it it still slower than > serial version ( 41 sec vs. 55 sec ). > Serbulent, It seems that in this notebook, http://nbviewer.ipython.org/github/wd15/fipy-efficiency/blob/master/notebooks/FiPy-IPython.ipynb, the serial version PCG using Trilinos is faster than the serial version of PySparse without preconditioning. Preconditioning with Trilinos can often impact efficiency quite heavily. > > I tried to use Gmsh mesh with using workaround defined at > http://wd15.github.io/2014/01/30/fipy-trilinos-anaconda/ > But Gmsh is even slower than normal mesh. > I don't think I factored that in when writing up the notebooks. I might look into that. > > Since I use a big mesh (400x400) I think, I will have communication issue > that defined at the end of the first notebook. > Take a look at the second notebook, http://nbviewer.ipython.org/github/wd15/fipy-efficiency/blob/master/notebooks/cluster.ipynb, 400x400 should be large enough to get some reasonable scaling. > > I'm open for any alternative strategies and suggestions. > I am not sure what to suggest. Certainly disable the preconditioners in Trilinos and see what happens. It may be that we need to use preconditioning in a less naive way in FiPy (not precondition at every sweep, there may be ways to do that with Trilinos). -- Daniel Wheeler
_______________________________________________ fipy mailing list [email protected] http://www.ctcms.nist.gov/fipy [ NIST internal ONLY: https://email.nist.gov/mailman/listinfo/fipy ]
