Re: [petsc-users] block ILU(K) is slower than the point-wise version?

> On Mar 7, 2017, at 9:41 PM, Fande Kong wrote: > > > > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 7:37 PM, Barry Smith wrote: > > > On Mar 7, 2017, at 4:35 PM, Kong, Fande wrote: > > > > I found one issue on my side. The preallocation is not right

Re: [petsc-users] block ILU(K) is slower than the point-wise version?

On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 7:55 PM, Barry Smith wrote: > >I have run your larger matrix on my laptop with "default" optimization > (so --with-debugging=0) this is what I get > > >

Re: [petsc-users] block ILU(K) is slower than the point-wise version?

Just for kicks I added MatMult_SeqBAIJ_11 to master and obtained a new MatMult5 1.0 4.4513e-02 1.0 1.94e+08 1.0 0.0e+00 0.0e+00 0.0e+00 5 8 0 0 0 8 8 0 0 0 2918 which demonstrates how the custom routines for different sizes can improve the performance. Note that

Re: [petsc-users] block ILU(K) is slower than the point-wise version?

On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 7:37 PM, Barry Smith wrote: > > > On Mar 7, 2017, at 4:35 PM, Kong, Fande wrote: > > > > I found one issue on my side. The preallocation is not right for the > BAIJ matrix. Will this slow down MatLUFactor and MatSolve? > > No,

Re: [petsc-users] block ILU(K) is slower than the point-wise version?

I have run your larger matrix on my laptop with "default" optimization (so --with-debugging=0) this is what I get EventCount Time (sec) Flop

Re: [petsc-users] block ILU(K) is slower than the point-wise version?

> On Mar 7, 2017, at 4:35 PM, Kong, Fande wrote: > > I found one issue on my side. The preallocation is not right for the BAIJ > matrix. Will this slow down MatLUFactor and MatSolve? No, but you should still fix it. > > How to converge AIJ to BAIJ using a command-line

Re: [petsc-users] block ILU(K) is slower than the point-wise version?

Fande : > I found one issue on my side. The preallocation is not right for the BAIJ > matrix. Will this slow down MatLUFactor and MatSolve? > preallocation should not affect ilu(0). > > How to converge AIJ to BAIJ using a command-line option? > -mat_type aij or -mat_type baij Hong > > >

Re: [petsc-users] block ILU(K) is slower than the point-wise version?

I found one issue on my side. The preallocation is not right for the BAIJ matrix. Will this slow down MatLUFactor and MatSolve? How to converge AIJ to BAIJ using a command-line option? Fande, On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 3:26 PM, Jed Brown wrote: > "Kong, Fande"

Re: [petsc-users] block ILU(K) is slower than the point-wise version?

"Kong, Fande" writes: > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 3:16 PM, Jed Brown wrote: > >> Hong writes: >> >> > Fande, >> > Got it. Below are what I get: >> >> Is Fande using ILU(0) or ILU(k)? (And I think it should be possible to >> get a

Re: [petsc-users] block ILU(K) is slower than the point-wise version?

On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 3:16 PM, Jed Brown wrote: > Hong writes: > > > Fande, > > Got it. Below are what I get: > > Is Fande using ILU(0) or ILU(k)? (And I think it should be possible to > get a somewhat larger benefit.) > I am using ILU(0). Will it be

Re: [petsc-users] block ILU(K) is slower than the point-wise version?

Hong writes: > Fande, > Got it. Below are what I get: Is Fande using ILU(0) or ILU(k)? (And I think it should be possible to get a somewhat larger benefit.) > petsc/src/ksp/ksp/examples/tutorials (master) > $ ./ex10 -f0 binaryoutput -rhs 0 -mat_view ascii::ascii_info > Mat

Re: [petsc-users] block ILU(K) is slower than the point-wise version?

> On Mar 7, 2017, at 3:26 PM, Kong, Fande wrote: > > > > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 2:07 PM, Barry Smith wrote: > >The matrix is too small. Please post ONE big matrix > > I am using "-ksp_view_pmat binary" to save the matrix. How can I save the >

Re: [petsc-users] block ILU(K) is slower than the point-wise version?

On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 2:07 PM, Barry Smith wrote: > >The matrix is too small. Please post ONE big matrix > I am using "-ksp_view_pmat binary" to save the matrix. How can I save the latest one only for a time-dependent problem? Fande, > > > On Mar 7, 2017, at 2:26

Re: [petsc-users] block ILU(K) is slower than the point-wise version?

Fande, Got it. Below are what I get: petsc/src/ksp/ksp/examples/tutorials (master) $ ./ex10 -f0 binaryoutput -rhs 0 -mat_view ascii::ascii_info Mat Object: 1 MPI processes type: seqaij rows=8019, cols=8019, bs=11 total: nonzeros=1890625, allocated nonzeros=1890625 total number of mallocs

Re: [petsc-users] block ILU(K) is slower than the point-wise version?

The matrix is too small. Please post ONE big matrix > On Mar 7, 2017, at 2:26 PM, Kong, Fande wrote: > > Uploaded to google drive, and sent you links in another email. Not sure if it > works or not. > > Fande, > > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:29 PM, Barry Smith

Re: [petsc-users] block ILU(K) is slower than the point-wise version?

Uploaded to google drive, and sent you links in another email. Not sure if it works or not. Fande, On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:29 PM, Barry Smith wrote: > >It is too big for email you can post it somewhere so we can download it. > > > > On Mar 7, 2017, at 12:01 PM, Kong,

Re: [petsc-users] block ILU(K) is slower than the point-wise version?

It is too big for email you can post it somewhere so we can download it. > On Mar 7, 2017, at 12:01 PM, Kong, Fande wrote: > > > > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Hong wrote: > I checked > MatILUFactorSymbolic_SeqBAIJ() and

Re: [petsc-users] block ILU(K) is slower than the point-wise version?

Fande : A small one, e.g., the size used by a sequential diagonal block for ilu preconditioner would work. Thanks, Hong > > > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Hong wrote: > >> I checked >> MatILUFactorSymbolic_SeqBAIJ() and MatILUFactorSymbolic_SeqAIJ(), >> they are

Re: [petsc-users] block ILU(K) is slower than the point-wise version?

On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Hong wrote: > I checked > MatILUFactorSymbolic_SeqBAIJ() and MatILUFactorSymbolic_SeqAIJ(), > they are virtually same. Why the version for BAIJ is so much slower? > I'll investigate it. > > Fande, > How large is your matrix? Is it possible to

Re: [petsc-users] block ILU(K) is slower than the point-wise version?

I checked MatILUFactorSymbolic_SeqBAIJ() and MatILUFactorSymbolic_SeqAIJ(), they are virtually same. Why the version for BAIJ is so much slower? I'll investigate it. Fande, How large is your matrix? Is it possible to send us your matrix so I can test it? Hong On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 9:08 PM,

Re: [petsc-users] Problems imposing boundary conditions

On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 11:11 AM, Maximilian Hartig wrote: > > On 7 Mar 2017, at 16:29, Matthew Knepley wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 3:28 AM, Maximilian Hartig com> wrote: > >> It seems you are correct. In theory, the

Re: [petsc-users] Problems imposing boundary conditions

> On 7 Mar 2017, at 16:29, Matthew Knepley wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 3:28 AM, Maximilian Hartig > wrote: > It seems you are correct. In theory, the problem should not be over > constrained. It is 1/4 of a

Re: [petsc-users] Problems imposing boundary conditions

On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 3:28 AM, Maximilian Hartig wrote: > It seems you are correct. In theory, the problem should not be over > constrained. It is 1/4 of a simple hollow cylinder geometry with rotational > symmetry around the z-axis. I restrict movement completely on

Re: [petsc-users] Problems imposing boundary conditions

It seems you are correct. In theory, the problem should not be over constrained. It is 1/4 of a simple hollow cylinder geometry with rotational symmetry around the z-axis. I restrict movement completely on the upper and lower (z) end as well as movement in x- and y- direction respectively on