On Thu 2009-03-19 08:04, Matthew Knepley wrote:
> Okay, I understand now. You are correct that this formulation should
> be available. In fact, I think it should be possible to make this the
> bottom of the hierarchy, with the linear case a specialization, and
> the identity case a specialization
On Wed 2009-03-18 18:34, Matthew Knepley wrote:
> Not a whole lot. Needs to go slower, since I think there are a bunch
> of embedded assumptions, and I worry that the most simple, general
> interface cannot be seen until they are clarified. I want it spelled
> out very very explicitly. So, to begin
Okay, I understand now. You are correct that this formulation should be
available.
In fact, I think it should be possible to make this the bottom of the
hierarchy, with
the linear case a specialization, and the identity case a specialization of
that (with
a MF application). This is a good chance to
On Wed 2009-03-18 13:59, Matthew Knepley wrote:
> I cannot understand why you cannot use TSSetMatrices()
TSSetMatrices is only for linear problems and doesn't generalize nicely
to nonlinear problems, especially with matrix-free methods. The
functionality I'm looking for involves a possibly variab
On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 5:27 PM, Jed Brown wrote:
> On Wed 2009-03-18 13:59, Matthew Knepley wrote:
> > I cannot understand why you cannot use TSSetMatrices()
>
> TSSetMatrices is only for linear problems and doesn't generalize nicely
> to nonlinear problems, especially with matrix-free methods.
I could not understand the post. We will have to go more slowly. To begin,
I cannot understand why you cannot use TSSetMatrices()
http://www.mcs.anl.gov/petsc/petsc-as/snapshots/petsc-dev/docs/manualpages/TS/TSSetMatrices.html#TSSetMatrices
Thanks,
Matt
On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 9:15 PM,
I have a use for high-order implicit strong stability preserving
integrators and plan to write a TS implementation based on some known
optimal methods (cf. Gottlieb, Ketcheson, Shu 2009). There are two
cases of interest that I don't think TS can currently handle.
Suppose we are using a Galerkin d
