I am testing GLPK 4.36. I tried a test case that I have also used with
GLPK 4.19.
Maximize
40 * x1 + 60 * x2
subject to
0 = x1
0 = x2
70 = 2 * x1 + x2
40 = x1 + x2
90 = x1 + 3 * x2
This problem is primal feasible. It is unbounded.
In
I am testing GLPK 4.36. I tried a test case that I have also used with
GLPK 4.19.
Maximize
40 * x1 + 60 * x2
subject to
0 = x1
0 = x2
70 = 2 * x1 + x2
40 = x1 + x2
90 = x1 + 3 * x2
This problem is primal feasible. It is
I am testing GLPK 4.36. I tried a test case that I have also used with
GLPK 4.19.
Maximize
40 * x1 + 60 * x2
subject to
0 = x1
0 = x2
70 = 2 * x1 + x2
40 = x1 + x2
90 = x1 + 3 * x2
This problem is primal feasible. It is
The documentation says:
GLP_PRIMAL-use two-phase primal simplex;
GLP_DUAL -use two-phase dual simplex;
GLP_DUALP -use two-phase dual simplex, and if it fails, switch to the
primal simplex.
Your point is that the dual simplex has solved the dual problem--the
dual problem is infeasible. That is
The documentation says:
GLP_PRIMAL-use two-phase primal simplex;
GLP_DUAL -use two-phase dual simplex;
GLP_DUALP -use two-phase dual simplex, and if it fails, switch to the
primal simplex.
Your point is that the dual simplex has solved the dual problem--the
dual problem is infeasible. That
