Yes

On Jul 31, 2014, at 11:04 AM, Qin Lu <[email protected]> wrote:

> Barry,
>  
> If I understand you correctly, I should number all unknowns owned by a 
> process contiguously before I construct the matrix, right?
>  
> Thanks,
> Qin  
> 
> From: Barry Smith <[email protected]>
> To: Qin Lu <[email protected]> 
> Cc: Matthew Knepley <[email protected]>; petsc-users 
> <[email protected]> 
> Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2014 10:46 AM
> Subject: Re: [petsc-users] Partition of parallel AIJ sparce matrix
> 
> 
> On Jul 31, 2014, at 9:35 AM, Qin Lu <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > Do you mean the user has to reorder both rows and columns (unknowns)? Or 
> > the renumbering of columns are done by PETSc?
> 
>   NO, never reorder the matrix. The degrees of freedom should be reordered to 
> be contiquous before any matrix is ever created. Then the matrix and 
> everything else is always computed with regard to this new ordering.
> 
>   Barry
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > Matthew's early response said that only rows need to renumbered by the user 
> > so that they are contiguous for each process. In my case, the order of 
> > unknowns have been determined before parallel partitioning, is this (just 
> > renumbering rows) Ok?
> >  
> > Thanks,
> > Qin    
> > 
> > From: Barry Smith <[email protected]>
> > To: Qin Lu <[email protected]> 
> > Cc: Matthew Knepley <[email protected]>; petsc-users 
> > <[email protected]> 
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2014 7:37 PM
> > Subject: Re: [petsc-users] Partition of parallel AIJ sparce matrix
> > 
> > 
> > On Jul 30, 2014, at 3:59 PM, Qin Lu <[email protected]> wrote:
> > 
> > > Renumbering row will make an unknown not associate with its row 
> > > (equation),
> > 
> >  It is a symmetric reordering. In matrix terms both the rows and columns 
> > are reordered the same way. In terms of spaces both the domain and range 
> > spaces are reordered the same way.
> > 
> >  Barry
> > 
> > 
> > > will this affect the solver performance? For example, will the infill 
> > > pattern change in ILU factorization?
> > >  
> > > Thanks,
> > > Qin 
> > > 
> > > From: Matthew Knepley <[email protected]>
> > > To: Qin Lu <[email protected]> 
> > > Cc: Barry Smith <[email protected]>; petsc-users 
> > > <[email protected]> 
> > > Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2014 3:50 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [petsc-users] Partition of parallel AIJ sparce matrix
> > > 
> > > On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Qin Lu <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > In the context of domain decompostion, if the unknowns are ordered (to 
> > > reduce the number of infills, for instance) in the way that each 
> > > subdomain may not own consecutive unknown index, does this mean the 
> > > partition of the domain will be different from the partition of the 
> > > matrix?
> > >  
> > > For example, if subdomain 1 (assigned to process 1) owns unknowns 1 and 3 
> > > (associated with equation 1 and 3), subdomain 2 (assigned to process 2) 
> > > owns unknowns 2 and 4 (associated with equation 2 and 4) , how can I make 
> > > each process own consecutive rows?
> > > 
> > > You renumber the rows once they are partitioned.
> > > 
> > >    Matt
> > > 
> > > 
> > >  
> > > Thanks,
> > > Qin
> > > 
> > > From: Barry Smith <[email protected]>
> > > To: Qin Lu <[email protected]> 
> > > Cc: petsc-users <[email protected]> 
> > > Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2014 2:49 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [petsc-users] Partition of parallel AIJ sparce matrix
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Jul 30, 2014, at 11:08 AM, Qin Lu <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Hello,
> > > >  
> > > > Does a process have to own consecutive rows of the matrix? For example, 
> > > > suppose the global AIJ is 4x4, partitioned by 2 processes. Does process 
> > > > 1 have to own rows 1 and 2, process 2 own rows 3 and 4?
> > > 
> > >  Yes
> > > 
> > > > Or process1 may own rows 1 and 3, and process 2 own row 2 and 4?
> > > 
> > >  However, the numbering of degrees of freedom is arbitrary. Just renumber 
> > > you degrees of freedom so the first set is on process 0, the next on 
> > > process 1 etc.
> > > 
> > >  Barry
> > > 
> > > 
> > > >  
> > > > Thanks a lot for your help!
> > > >  
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Qin
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > 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
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 

Reply via email to