On 30.11.2011 16:22, Matthew Knepley wrote: > On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 9:10 AM, Alexander Grayver > <agrayver at gfz-potsdam.de <mailto:agrayver at gfz-potsdam.de>> wrote: > > I'm not sure that MAT(S)BAIJ is what I need. My matrix symmetric, > but not block. > Well, I solve vector equations and there are 2-3 blocks (depending > on the problem dimension), but this blocks normaly have size of > > 10^5. So which block size should I specify to be efficient? > > > Just use 1.
And for d_nz/o_nz also 1? > > Matt > > Regards, > Alexander > > On 30.11.2011 14:27, Alexander Grayver wrote: >> Thanks Matt! >> >> Regards, >> Alexander >> >> On 30.11.2011 14:16, Matthew Knepley wrote: >>> On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 3:43 AM, Alexander Grayver >>> <agrayver at gfz-potsdam.de <mailto:agrayver at gfz-potsdam.de>> wrote: >>> >>> Hello, >>> >>> I'm trying to use mumps through PETSc now with symmetric >>> matrix and cholesky factorization. >>> When I use it directly I fill up only upper part of the >>> matrix and set mumid%SYM = 2. Is that possible to follow >>> same way with petsc? >>> Which options do I have to choose? >>> >>> >>> >>> http://www.mcs.anl.gov/petsc/petsc-dev/docs/manualpages/Mat/MATSBAIJ.html >>> >>> Matt >>> >>> Thanks in advance. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Alexander >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> 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 >> > > > > > -- > 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20111130/c1bd227e/attachment.htm>
