On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 12:58 PM, Matthew Knepley <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 2:55 PM Jed Brown <[email protected]> wrote: > >> PETSc had a Euclid interface until Barry removed it. >> >> https://bitbucket.org/petsc/petsc/commits/22b6d1ca80e4f79123036fb6afd7eb >> 4463b3692a >> >> See also >> >> https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg33196.html > > > I would also add that it is considerate of Hypre to have such a terrible > ILUT implementation > because it reminds you that you should never ever ever use ILUT. > So in theory, can we have a much better implementation? From my understanding, algorithm itself is not suitable for parallel computation, and it might not be a implementation problem only. Fande, > Matt > > >> >> Fande Kong <[email protected]> writes: >> >> > Hi Developers, >> > >> > The hypre user manual has this statement (page 63): >> > >> > "Note: this code is no longer supported by the hypre team. We recommend >> to >> > use Euclid instead, >> > which is more versatile and in general more efficient, especially when >> used >> > with many processors." >> > >> > >> > https://computation.llnl.gov/sites/default/files/public/ >> hypre-2.11.2_usr_manual.pdf >> > >> > >> > >> > It may be a good idea to upgrade PETSc interface to use Euclid instead >> of >> > PILUT?? >> > >> > >> > Fande, >> > > > -- > 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 > > https://www.cse.buffalo.edu/~knepley/ <http://www.caam.rice.edu/~mk51/> >
