Great, I just didn't understand the name.
> On Oct 29, 2018, at 3:30 PM, Mark Adams <mfad...@lbl.gov> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 2:35 PM Smith, Barry F. <bsm...@mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > > Why not just stop it once it is equal to or less than the minimum values > set by the person. > > That is what it does now. It stops when it is below the value given. > > Thus you need not "backtrack" by removing levels but the user still has some > control over preventing a "tiny" coarse problem. For example in this case if > the user set a minimum of 1000 it would end up with 642 unknowns on the > coarse level > > Yes, that is what it would do now. I thought you wanted something different. > > which is likely better than 6 or 54. > > > > Barry > > > > On Oct 29, 2018, at 8:27 AM, Mark Adams <mfad...@lbl.gov> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Sun, Oct 28, 2018 at 4:54 PM Smith, Barry F. <bsm...@mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > > > > Moved a question not needed in the public discussions to petsc-dev to > > ask Mark. > > > > > > Mark, > > > > PCGAMGSetCoarseEqLim - Set maximum number of equations on coarsest grid > > > > Is there a way to set the minimum number of equations on the coarse grid > > also? This particular case goes down to 6, 54 and 642 unknowns on the > > coarsest grids when I'm guessing it would be better to stop at 642 unknowns > > for the coarsest level. > > > > No, because I don't know how it is going to coarsen I did not want to > > bother with backtracking (I do when there is an error on the coarse grid so > > it would be easy to add this but I don't think it is worth the clutter). > > >
