On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Sun, Hui <[email protected]> wrote: > I do have my code set up based on ex70. The reason I do this is that I > need to use fieldsplit and schur complement. I can't find other examples > doing that, except ex55 and ex70, however I have a hard time get ex55 > running. > > I don't understand what you said about "This example uses a simple > decomposition, not what you use above". What do you mean by "simple > decomposition"? >
I use FieldSplit and schur on SNES ex62. Matt > ________________________________________ > From: Jed Brown [[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, August 01, 2014 11:15 PM > To: Sun, Hui; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [petsc-users] Some possible bugs with PETSC_VIEWER_BINARY_? > > "Sun, Hui" <[email protected]> writes: > > Here you can see I have 4 processors running at the same time. I read in > the output from MATLAB using the > > > > command [A,B,C,D,x,b,y] = PetscBinaryRead('binaryoutput'). > > > > > > And I visualize the variable y by the commands: > > > > mesh(reshape(y(20001:30000),100,100)) > > > > mesh(reshape(y(10001:20000),100,100)) > > > > mesh(reshape(y(1:10000),100,100)) > > > > > > The output plots are different from what I get if I use 1 processor. > > This example uses a simple decomposition, not what you use above. > > Note that this example was contributed and we do not endorse it as > recommended practice. If your code is already set up very much like > this, it may be worth looking at, but don't write new code in this way > because it is algorithmically constraining. > -- 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
