Should PetscInitialize() take a comm argument, then?
On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > > On Apr 5, 2013, at 10:09 AM, Dmitry Karpeev <karpeev at mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 7:42 PM, Jed Brown <jedbrown at mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > > > > It seems to me this is related to Moose's new MultiApp capability: > solving different systems on subcommunicators (with the interaction between > the systems handled outside of PETSc)? It may be that the cleaner approach > is to have the subsystems (their solvers, rather) use prefixes to set their > specific options. > > Would that be enough? > > > > Dmitry. > > > > If PETSc is only aware of the subcommunicator then it could be that > the right model is to set PETSC_COMM_WORLD to be the sub comm of > MPI_COMM_WORLD before PetscInitialize(), then PETSc only sees that sub > communicator. But you will NOT be able to use PETSc on anything that > "connects" these various sub communicators together. > > Barry > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20130405/60e90b22/attachment.html>
