On Sun, Oct 13, 2019 at 5:25 AM Pierre Gubernatis via petsc-users < [email protected]> wrote:
> Hello all, > > It souds that the best way to introduce petsc in a code is not to > introduce it, but develop the code over the petsc structure. > All things being equal, yes, but few users start with PETSc from scratch. You situation is normal and Matt's suggestion of mirroring your mesh in PETSc mesh object (DM) is a common approach. > It is probably true but my problem is that my existing code already is > equipped with a domain decomposition based on MPI (a typical themal > hydraulic with cartesian staggered mesh) > > The user can slice the domain in sub-domains and construct a linear > problem by block: each sub-domain assembles its part of the operator and > its part of the RHS. > > I am wondering what is the best way now to introduce petsc (considering > that I don’t want to assemble a global operator on a given proc). Is there > an example that would show how to introduce petsc in this situation ? > Thank you, Pierre >
