On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 19:43, Vijay S. Mahadevan <vijay.m at gmail.com> wrote:
> Are there any added advantages in terms of > performance/memory footprint and such between the two ? > Generally, ML takes less memory and it returns coarse level operators to PETSc so you have a lot more flexibility (you can use all of PETSc's preconditioners as smoothers, you can control each level independently, and you have lots of options to solve the coarse-level problem). ML needs fewer levels and has lower setup costs. BoomerAMG usually produces a more robust hierarchy so it works for some problems that ML does not. It is basically a black box so you only have the flexibility that they specifically provided (rather than everything in PETSc plus whatever you might want to do). Jed -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20101203/5b63ff73/attachment-0001.htm>
