OK, Im not familiar with debugger (!!) but I will try to see something with valgrind... I thougth I have already checked the prototypes of all functions when upgrading with petsc-3.1.p8 and petsc-3.2.p5, but will do that again.
Thanks anyway. Best Regards. John Le 23 novembre 2011 17:44, Satish Balay <balay at mcs.anl.gov> a ?crit : > > [1]PETSC ERROR: d_nnz cannot be less than 0: local row 78 value > -750763693! > > There is something wrong in your code. You'll have to verify the > prototypes of all functions - with the petsc-3.2 documentation. > > And valgrind is an easy way to pinpoint to the problem source. [also a > debugger should show you whats going wrong] > > Satish > > > On Wed, 23 Nov 2011, jean-frederic thebault wrote: > > > Well, actually, when I call MatSetFromOption, with the right arguments, > the > > whole simulation is running, but there are some PETSC-ERROR about nnz, > and > > when I comment the calling of MatSetFromOption, the simulation (program) > > stop at the first calculation. This time, I'm putting in this email the > > log-file with calling of MatSetFromOption (then with PETSC-ERROR on > nnz)... > > > > Le 23 novembre 2011 17:17, Satish Balay <balay at mcs.anl.gov> a ?crit : > > > > > Since you get a SEGV - I would suggest running the code in the > > > debugger - to check where its crashing. > > > > > > Also run with valgrind to see where problems start.. Mostlikely the > > > issues would be change in prototypes for PETSc functions - between > > > releases. > > > > > > Satish > > > > > > On Wed, 23 Nov 2011, jean-frederic thebault wrote: > > > > > > > Thanks for your response. > > > > > > > > Sorry about that, to reduce the size of the log file, unfortunetly, > I did > > > > took out the bad lines... In the out.log I've put in this email, I've > > > make > > > > sure there are... > > > > > > > > Actually, I don't use MatSetOption, but MatSetFromOption instead. > > > However, > > > > when I called MatSetFromOption, the PETSC_COMM_WORLD was missing. But > > > now, > > > > it's getting worse !! (as you could see in the out.log included in > this > > > > email). > > > > > > > > Le 23 novembre 2011 15:55, Jed Brown <jedbrown at mcs.anl.gov> a ?crit > : > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 08:24, jean-frederic thebault < > > > > > jean-frederic at thebault-net.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> I'm wondering what's wrong in my code. I'm using PETSc to solve a > > > linear > > > > >> system, and willing to use a multi-processor computer. 9 years > ago, I > > > used > > > > >> petsc-2.1.3 with success. Few weeks ago, I've update petsc with > the > > > 3.1-p8 > > > > >> version and made the necessary changes to work with. No problem. > And > > > > >> recently, I've migrate to petsc-3.2-p5. Compilation is OK. But > when I > > > do > > > > >> simulation, now, I have some PETSC-ERROR in the log file, even > using > > > only > > > > >> one processor (see the out.log file in this email). > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > You are calling MatSetOption() with the wrong number of arguments. > C > > > > > compilers tell you about this, but Fortran compilers do not. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.mcs.anl.gov/petsc/petsc-current/docs/manualpages/Mat/MatSetOption.html > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> However, I think I defined MatMPI and VecMPI correctly, according > to > > > the > > > > >> doc. The log file tell that something wrong with the nnz which > should > > > not > > > > >> be greater than row length (??). > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > The log you sent does not say anything about nnz. Fix the call to > > > > > MatSetOption(). > > > > > > > > > > And also, with the previous version of PETSc I've used, the were > no > > > > >> problem using -pc_type bjacobi and -sub_pc_type sor, juste to > solve > > > linear > > > > >> system doing parallel computations and because SOR is not > > > parallelized. But > > > > >> now, when I use -pc_type bjacobi and -sub_pc_type sor, with 3 > rank, I > > > > >> experiment some convergence problem during my simulation. > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > These options should do the same thing they used to do. Make sure > you > > > are > > > > > assembling correctly. If it's still confusing, run the old and new > > > code with > > > > > > > > > > -ksp_monitor_true_residual -ksp_converged_reason -ksp_view -pc_type > > > > > bjacobi -sub_pc_type sor > > > > > > > > > > and send the output of both for us to look at. > > > > > > > > > > Also note that you can use -pc_type sor even in parallel. There are > > > > > options for local iterations and full iterations. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20111123/391adccc/attachment.htm>
