On Wed, 19 May 2010 16:27:13 -0600, Derek Gaston <fried...@gmail.com> wrote: > Would this really be the case? I thought NumericVector kept track of > whether or not it was closed and wouldn't redo communication. > Certainly I can't imagine Petsc redoing communication if you close a > vector twice (what would it communicate the second time?).
It has to do a reduction to make sure everyone agrees that nothing changed. This will be cheap for most use cases and most architectures, but perhaps not always. Jed ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Libmesh-devel mailing list Libmesh-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libmesh-devel
