I met a case where MUMPS returned an out-of-memory code but PETSc continued to run. When PETSc calls MUMPS, it checks if (A->erroriffailure). I added -mat_error_if_failure, but it did not work since it was overwritten by MatSetErrorIfFailure(pc->pmat,pc->erroriffailure) Does it suggest we should add a new option -pc_factor_error_if_failure and check it in PCSetFromOptions_Factor()?
--Junchao Zhang On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 8:12 PM Zhang, Hong <hzh...@mcs.anl.gov<mailto:hzh...@mcs.anl.gov>> wrote: Mike: Hello PETSc team: I am trying to solve a PDE problem with high-order finite elements. The matrix is getting denser and my experience is that MUMPS just outperforms iterative solvers. For certain problems, MUMPS just fail in the middle for no clear reason. I just wander if there is any suggestion to improve the robustness of MUMPS? Or in general, any suggestion for interative solver with very high-order finite elements? What error message do you get when MUMPS fails? Out of memory, zero pivoting, or something? Hong
