On Jun 21, 2012, at 10:46 PM, Matthew Knepley wrote: > On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 4:16 PM, Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > > > > That works, yes. Is the issue that stages / events need to be activated a > > priori, which is not possible when PetscLogView is only called at the end > > of the program? > > > > Crap. > > Matt, why is this "Crap" its completely reasonable that if you want to > have logging from program control that you have to turn it on programatically? > > Crap, because I should have remembered earlier.
FAQ or some other mechanism to "remember this". We can't be relying on our memories :-) Actually, why not have PetscLogView() print an error message if PetscLogBegin() was not previously called? Instead of just not have data to display? Then we won't need to remember anything? Barry > > Matt > > > If you do not provide -log_summary, you need PetscLogBegin() at the > > beginning. > > > > Matt > > > > The caveat is that I am assuming that when using log_summary, the log is > > written as part of PetscFinalize, so that if a job is killed by the > > sceduler or the user, there is no way to get an idea of the performances. I > > like to print the log every so often. > > > > Blaise > > > > -- > > Department of Mathematics and Center for Computation & Technology > > Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA > > Tel. +1 (225) 578 1612, Fax +1 (225) 578 4276 > > http://www.math.lsu.edu/~bourdin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their > > experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their > > experiments lead. > > -- Norbert Wiener > > > > > -- > What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their experiments > is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their experiments > lead. > -- Norbert Wiener
