The usual workaround is to give the vectors different prefixes. On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 9:10 AM, Hong Zhang <hzhang at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
> You use same datafile 'vec.dat' for writing two different vectors, > V3 and V1: > > ierr = VecView(V1, view_out); > ierr = VecView(V3, view_out); > > // here, vec.dat holds V3 > > Then read it in the order > ierr = VecLoad(V1, view_in); > //crash here because reading V3 into V1 > > ierr = VecLoad(V3, view_in); > > Comment out one of vectors, your code works fine. > > Hong > > > > > On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 7:54 AM, Anton Popov <popov at uni-mainz.de> wrote: > >> Dear petsc team, >> >> could you please tell me what's wrong with the attached example file? >> I run it on 4 processors with petsc-3.3-p1. >> >> What could error message "Local size 1000 not compatible with block size >> 3!" mean? >> >> I've another question related to this issue. What is the real purpose of >> PetscViewerBinarySkipInfo function? >> I see no reason to skip creating "info" file, because the file produced >> by the attached example seems to be correct. >> >> Moreover, similar block size error occurs in our code while reading file >> with multiple vectors, irrespective whether "info" file exists or not. >> >> Thank you, >> >> Anton >> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120718/4bbf9b6b/attachment.html>
