On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 20:55, Vijay S. Mahadevan <vijay.m at gmail.com> wrote:
> Actually, that is quite consistent in philosophy to the merge > operation I'm trying to perform. SEQ->MPI might still be an invalid > operation for Vec though. Perhaps with a PETSC_DECIDE for local, it > still could be relevant ? You can definitely specialize this for > MPI->SEQ and Nest Vectors with a new VecReuse enum with relevant > names. > I would not try to simultaneously change the distribution of the Vec. That's what VecScatter is for. VecConvert() would keep the same distribution and give you back a semantically identical vector of a different type. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20111017/08e7ba19/attachment.html>
