Thanks for clarifying that. So if I have my subdomain set as
0 —— 1 —— 2 —— 3 —— 4 —— 5 —— 6 | subdomain 1 | subdomain 2 | subdomain 1 | Should I actually make sure that I define 3 separate subdomains? Currently, my subdomains are defined depending on a parameter of the system of PDEs I’m solving. Thanks, Simone On Sep 5, 2018, at 12:37 PM, Fande Kong <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 9:54 AM Smith, Barry F. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: 2 should belong to one of the subdomains, either one is fine. Barry > On Sep 5, 2018, at 10:46 AM, Rossi, Simone > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > I’m trying to setup GASM, but I’m probably misunderstanding something. > > If I have this mesh > > 0 —— 1 —— 2 —— 3 —— 4 > subdomain 1 | subdomain 2 > You may need to make a decision which subdomain ``2" belongs to. Most people just let the shared node go to the lower MPI rank. If so, in this example, ``2" belongs to the subdomain one. iis1 = {0, 1, 2} ois = {0, 1, 2, 3} iis2 = {3, 4} ois2 = {2, 3, 4} You consider seriously to use GASM, I would suggest to partition your problem (using ``hierach") in such a way that multi-rank subdomain is actually connected, otherwise you may end up having a deficient performance. Thanks, Fande, > I create an interior (no overlap) and an outer (with overlap) IS for both > subdomains. > > In my naive understanding > > iis1 = {0, 1} > ois1 = {0, 1, 2} > > and > > iis2 = {3, 4} > ois2 = {2, 3, 4} > > but then the node at the interface (node 2) does not belong to any interior > IS. Should node 2 belong to both interior IS? Or should it belong only to one > of the domains? > > Thanks, > Simone > > > On Aug 15, 2018, at 22:11, Griffith, Boyce Eugene > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > >> >> >>> On Aug 15, 2018, at 10:07 PM, Smith, Barry F. >>> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Yes you can have "overlapping fields" with FIELDSPLIT but I don't think you >>> can use FIELDSPLIT for your case. You seem to have a geometric >>> decomposition into regions. ASM and GASM are intended for such >>> decompositions. Fieldsplit is for multiple fields that each live across the >>> entire domain. >> >> Basically there is one field the lives on the entire domain, and another >> field that lives only on a subdomain. >> >> Perhaps we could do GASM for the geometric split and FIELDSPLIT within the >> subdomain with the two fields. >> >>> Barry >>> >>> >>>> On Aug 15, 2018, at 7:42 PM, Griffith, Boyce Eugene >>>> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Is it permissible to have overlapping fields in FIELDSPLIT? We are >>>> specifically thinking about how to handle DOFs living on the interface >>>> between two regions. >>>> >>>> Thanks! >>>> >>>> — Boyce >>> >> >
