On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 11:01 PM, Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
> Now we need to make several more decisions. > > 1) are PETSc package registrations collective? sys, vec, mat, dm, ksp, > snes, ts > currently as Jed noted they are not except with dynamic loading of > PETSc libs > > 2) are all PETSc packages registered upfront during PetscInitialize()? > currently only with dynamic loading of petsc libs > I don't like the reverse dependency that this implies. > 2a) If all PETSc packages are registered up front what is the mechanism to > turn off registering some? Thought Matt disagrees there is always some > asshole who says, I don't use TS so I don't want it registered. > Can we make XXInitializePackage() collective on an explicit comm _and_ safe to call on a communicator for which some ranks are already initialized? I think this would make it possible to provide a deadlock-safe implementation. A user should explicit call XXInitializePackage(comm) if they ever encounterd IO performance issues (due to collective loads on many small comms). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20130204/46c0479c/attachment.html>
