I have started a branch with utilities to help catch/handle these integer 
overflow issues 
https://bitbucket.org/petsc/petsc/pull-requests/389/add-utilities-for-handling-petscint/diff
 all suggestions are appreciated

  Barry

> On Nov 16, 2015, at 12:26 PM, Eric Chamberland 
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Barry,
> 
> I can't launch the code again and retrieve other informations, since I am not 
> allowed to do so: the cluster have around ~780 nodes and I got a very special 
> permission to reserve 530 of them...
> 
> So the best I can do is to give you the backtrace PETSc gave me... :/
> (see the first post with the backtrace: 
> http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/2015-November/027644.html)
> 
> And until today, all smaller meshes with the same solver succeeded to 
> complete... (I went up to 219 millions of unknowns on 64 nodes).
> 
> I understand then that there could be some use of PetscInt64 in the actual 
> code that would help fix problems like the one I got.  I found it is a big 
> challenge to track down all occurrence of this kind of overflow in the code, 
> due to the size of the systems you have to have to reproduce this problem....
> 
> Eric
> 
> 
> On 16/11/15 12:40 PM, Barry Smith wrote:
>> 
>>   Eric,
>> 
>>     The behavior you get with bizarre integers and a crash is not the 
>> behavior we want. We would like to detect these overflows appropriately.   
>> If you can track through the error and determine the location where the 
>> overflow occurs then we would gladly put in additional checks and use of 
>> PetscInt64 to handle these things better. So let us know the exact cause and 
>> we'll improve the code.
>> 
>>   Barry
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Nov 16, 2015, at 11:11 AM, Eric Chamberland 
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On 16/11/15 10:42 AM, Matthew Knepley wrote:
>>>> Sometimes when we do not have exact counts, we need to overestimate
>>>> sizes. This is especially true
>>>> in sparse MatMat.
>>> 
>>> Ok... so, to be sure, I am correct if I say that recompiling petsc with
>>> "--with-64-bit-indices" is the only solution to my problem?
>>> 
>>> I mean, no other fixes exist for this overestimation in a more recent 
>>> release of petsc, like putting the result in a "long int" instead?
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> 
>>> Eric
>>> 
> 

Reply via email to