On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Karl Rupp <rupp at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
> Hi guys, > > > > I vote a). No new function, gets rid of a stupid optimization that > > does no one any good, and is the simplest. > > > > > > I also think (b) is becoming over-complicated. If someone knows their > > stencil and cares about memory usage, they can just pass the correct > > values. The defaults are terribly for anything but a 5-point stencil > anyway. > > > for completeness, here's how b) would look like: > > https://bitbucket.org/petsc/**petsc/commits/** > 814b6bb1ec0ea67e05a42f7f07cab1**169a9be913<https://bitbucket.org/petsc/petsc/commits/814b6bb1ec0ea67e05a42f7f07cab1169a9be913> > > This has the additional freedom of being able to deal with different > defaults for on- and off-processor blocks correctly at the expense of a > separate function MatSeqAIJSetPreallocation_**SeqAIJAlloc() > > I can confirm that this fixes the issues with GPUs. If, on the other hand, > we pick a), then code gets substantially simpler even than it is now. As > noted, the only drawback is that the default preallocation for on- and > off-processor values is the same. I can live with that. > Still want simpler. Matt > Best regards, > Karli > > > > -- 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20130321/fe6ae8be/attachment-0001.html>
