Is TSTrajectory and its API (in the public header petscts.h) supposed to be
used from outside a TSAdjointSolve?
Actually, it is not usable: take for example TSTrajectoryGet() with a given
step number: then, if I want to use BASIC it will always return the last
step recorded from the previous TSSolve (this behavior is common to all the
TSTrajectory implementantions)
static PetscErrorCode TSTrajectoryGet_Basic(TSTrajectory tj,TS ts,PetscInt
stepnum,PetscReal *t)
{
Vec Sol,*Y;
PetscInt Nr,i;
PetscViewer viewer;
PetscReal timepre;
char filename[PETSC_MAX_PATH_LEN];
PetscErrorCode ierr;
PetscFunctionBegin;
ierr = TSGetTotalSteps(ts,&stepnum);CHKERRQ(ierr);
ierr = PetscSNPrintf(filename,sizeof
filename,"SA-data/SA-%06d.bin",stepnum);CHKERRQ(ierr);
Undoubtedly, this code can be very useful inside a TSAdjointSolve (where
total_steps is manually decremented...) but not from a user that wants to
experiment with the class.
I would really like to reuse TSTrajectory for a continuous adjoint problem
I'm currently working on, and I believe this class should be somewhat
refactored. Here are a couple of examples from the public API
PetscErrorCode TSTrajectoryGet(TSTrajectory tj,TS ts,PetscInt
stepnum,PetscReal *time)
{
PetscErrorCode ierr;
PetscFunctionBegin;
if (!tj)
SETERRQ(PetscObjectComm((PetscObject)ts),PETSC_ERR_ARG_WRONGSTATE,"TS
solver did not save trajectory");
....
PetscErrorCode TSTrajectorySet(TSTrajectory tj,TS ts,PetscInt
stepnum,PetscReal time,Vec X)
{
PetscErrorCode ierr;
PetscFunctionBegin;
if (!tj) PetscFunctionReturn(0);
We can use this thread to start a discussion on how it can be refactored,
and I'm willing to contribute.
I personally believe TSTrajectory should not be exposed in the public API
(at least put in the private headers) in the upcoming release.
Thanks,
--
Stefano
