Is it possible to download this particular matrix, so I can do standalone investigation?
Sherry On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 12:22 PM, Eric Chamberland < [email protected]> wrote: > Hi Fande, > > I don't know, I am working and validating with a DEBUG version of PETSc, > and this "mwe" is a 30x30 matrix... > > But I "hope" the parallel version is faster for large problems... if it is > not maybe it should be somewhat reviewed... > > Eric > > > On 22/05/18 02:22 PM, Fande Kong wrote: > >> Hi Eric, >> >> I am curious if the parallel symbolic factoriation is faster than the >> sequential version? Do you have timing? >> >> >> Fande, >> >> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 12:18 PM, Eric Chamberland < >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> On 22/05/18 02:03 PM, Smith, Barry F. wrote: >> >> >> Hmm, why would >> >> the resolution with *sequential* symbolic factorisation >> gives ans err around 1e-6 instead of 1e-16 for parallel one >> (when it works). >> >> >> ? One would think that doing a "sequential" symbolic >> factorization won't affect the answer to this huge amount? >> Perhaps this is the problem that needs to be addressed. >> >> >> I do agree that this is a huge amount of difference... and if we >> agree this is also a bug, than it means there are not one but two >> bugs that deserve to be fixed... >> >> Thanks, >> >> Eric >> >> >>
