Thanks for your explanation. It is much clearer now.
I have just submitted an issue on the bugtracker (for
DMShellSetCreateFieldDecomposition Fortran interface)
I am going to work on your other proposals (using PetscObjectCompose or
wrap my decomposition).
I'll let you know what it gives !
Thanks
On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 9:17 AM, Natacha BEREUX
wrote:
> Dear Matt,
> I re-checked the master branch. To be precise, I downloaded the nightly
> tarball this morning (from http://ftp.mcs.anl.gov/pub/
> petsc/petsc-master.tar.gz)
> I am sure that the Fortran interface of
Dear Matt,
I re-checked the master branch. To be precise, I downloaded the nightly
tarball this morning (from
http://ftp.mcs.anl.gov/pub/petsc/petsc-master.tar.gz)
I am sure that the Fortran interface of DMSellSetCreateFieldDecomposition
is missing.
And it is quite tricky to add it. I have tried
On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 1:09 PM, Matthew Knepley wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Natacha BEREUX > wrote:
>
>> Dear Matt,
>> Sorry for my (very) late reply.
>> I was not able to find the Fortran interface of
>>
On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Natacha BEREUX
wrote:
> Dear Matt,
> Sorry for my (very) late reply.
> I was not able to find the Fortran interface of
> DMSellSetCreateFieldDecomposition in the late petsc-3.7.6 fortran (and my
> code still fails to link).
> I have the
Dear Matt,
Sorry for my (very) late reply.
I was not able to find the Fortran interface of
DMSellSetCreateFieldDecomposition in the late petsc-3.7.6 fortran (and my
code still fails to link).
I have the feeling that it is missing in the master branch.
And I was not able to get it on bitbucket
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 1:45 PM, Natacha BEREUX
wrote:
> Hello Matt,
> Thanks a lot for your answers.
> Since I am working on a large FEM Fortran code, I have to stick to
> Fortran.
> Do you know if someone plans to add this Fortran interface? Or may be I
> could do it
Hello Matt,
Thanks a lot for your answers.
Since I am working on a large FEM Fortran code, I have to stick to Fortran.
Do you know if someone plans to add this Fortran interface? Or may be I
could do it myself ? Is this particular interface very hard to add ?
Perhaps could I mimic some other
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:03 AM, Natacha BEREUX
wrote:
> Hello,
> if my understanding is correct, the approach proposed by Matt and Lawrence
> is the following :
> - create a DMShell (DMShellCreate)
> - define my own CreateFieldDecomposition to return the index sets I
Hello,
if my understanding is correct, the approach proposed by Matt and Lawrence
is the following :
- create a DMShell (DMShellCreate)
- define my own CreateFieldDecomposition to return the index sets I need
(for displacement, pressure and temperature degrees of freedom) :
Thanks for your quick answers. To be honest, I am not familiar at all with
DMShells and DMPlexes. But since it is what I need, I am going to try it.
Thanks again for your advices,
Natacha
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 2:27 PM, Lawrence Mitchell <
lawrence.mitch...@imperial.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> > On 21
> On 21 Mar 2017, at 13:24, Matthew Knepley wrote:
>
> I think the remedy is as easy as specifying a DMShell that has a PetscSection
> (DMSetDefaultSection) with your ordering, and
> I think this is how Firedrake (http://www.firedrakeproject.org/) does it.
We actually don't
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Natacha BEREUX
wrote:
> Dear PETSc user's,
> I am trying to solve a poroelasticity problem with an additional
> temperature equation. The problem is a 3 fields problem involving a
> displacement field (u), a pressure field (p) and a
Dear PETSc user's,
I am trying to solve a poroelasticity problem with an additional
temperature equation. The problem is a 3 fields problem involving a
displacement field (u), a pressure field (p) and a temperature field (t).
I have seen similar examples in
14 matches
Mail list logo