On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 3:00 PM, Jed Brown <jedbrown at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
> > Even in Barry's original code, I don't understand why we can expect this > check to be producing a collective result. Surely there can be some ranks > that see everything evenly divide and others that do not. > > It seems to me that we should either (a) explicitly disallow matrices with > a block size to be built when the blocks are not filled or (b) when the > user requests blocks, pad blocks so that we can always use an ISBlock. > It shouldn't be hard to build a test that will expose this problem. Just declare a block size (2), then assemble a matrix that does not fill out the block size. In the off-diagonal part of rank 0, we should have one full block, while in the off-diagonal part of rank 1, we should have anything that isn't a perfect block. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20130218/a6ea210b/attachment.html>
