Barry
>
>
> > On May 8, 2019, at 7:44 AM, Matthew Knepley via petsc-users <
> petsc-users@mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, May 8, 2019 at 4:45 AM Justin Chang via petsc-users <
> petsc-users@mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
> > Hi guys,
> >
> >
Colin,
1) What equations are you solving?
2) In your second case, you set the outer ksp to preonly, thus we are
unable to see the ksp_monitor for the (firedrake_0_) solver. Set it to
gmres and see if you have a similar output to your first case:
0 KSP preconditioned resid norm
Use -ksp_type fgmres if your inner ksp solvers are gmres. Maybe that will
help?
On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 1:33 PM Rossi, Simone via petsc-users <
petsc-users@mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
> Thanks Barry.
>
> Let me know if you can spot anything out of the ksp_view
>
>
> KSP Object: 1 MPI processes
>
>
Hi Aditya,
I wouldn't trust FEniCS' wrappers around PETSc. It might also depend on the
version of DOLFIN you're working with.
Shameless plug: Try using pfibs
https://github.com/NREL/pfibs
We wrote a slightly better PETSc interface to FEniCS. It does require
FEniCS 2018.1.0 or higher. This
el 0) N=8541, n data rows=1, n data cols=1,
>>>> nnz/row (ave)=5, np=1
>>>> [0] PCGAMGFilterGraph(): 99.9114% nnz after filtering, with threshold
>>>> 0., 5.42079 nnz ave. (N=8541)
>>>> [0] PCGAMGCoarsen_AGG(): Square Graph on level 1 of 1 to square
. Check that the smoother can actually solve the
>>> problem.
>>>
>>>
>>>> but as soon as I look at a bigger system, like a network with 8500
>>>> buses, the out-of-box gamg craps out. I am not sure where to start when it
>>>> comes t
in the next section.
On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 1:47 PM Matthew Knepley wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 3:20 PM Justin Chang via petsc-users <
> petsc-users@mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'm working with some folks to extract a linear system of equat
ons.set('fieldsplit_0_fieldsplit_p1_pc_type','hypre')
>>> PETScOptions.set('fieldsplit_1_ksp_type','preonly')
>>> PETScOptions.set('fieldsplit_1_pc_type','fieldsplit')
>>> PETScOptions.set('fieldsplit_1_pc_fieldsplit_type','schur')
>>> PETScOptions.set('fieldsplit_
Hi all,
I am solving a six field battery problem (concentration and potential for
each of the two solid and one electrolyte domains) and I want to experiment
with nested/recursice fieldsplitting. I have the IS's and am able to use
these to define my PCFieldSplitsSetIS(). However, I can imagine
