On Jul 17, 2012, at 10:07 PM, Jed Brown wrote: > On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 10:06 PM, Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > Ok, then the destructor called by the MPI_Comm_del() would decrease the > reference count by one and if it gets to zero then does the delete as usual. > > This is exactly what is done, but PETSC_COMM_WORLD and PETSC_COMM_SELF > outlive PetscFinalize, so we remove one more reference count for each of > those so that it actually gets collected.
But Shri indicated there is a possible problem, what is that problem? Or is there none? Barry
