https://www.mcs.anl.gov/petsc/documentation/faq.html#valgrind
> On Oct 31, 2018, at 9:18 PM, Wenjin Xing wrote:
>
> Hi Barry
>
> As you said, I have set the mat option to Aij. (MATAIJ = "aij" - A matrix
> type to be used for sparse matrices. This matrix type is identical to
> MATSEQAIJ
> On Oct 31, 2018, at 5:39 PM, Appel, Thibaut via petsc-users
> wrote:
>
> Well yes naturally for the residual but adding -ksp_true_residual just gives
>
> 0 KSP unpreconditioned resid norm 3.583290589961e+00 true resid norm
> 3.583290589961e+00 ||r(i)||/||b|| 1.e+00
> 1 KSP
This option only works with AIJ matrices; you must be using either BAIJ or
SBAIJ matrices? (or a shell matrix)
Barry
> On Oct 31, 2018, at 5:45 AM, Wenjin Xing via petsc-users
> wrote:
>
> My issue is summarized in the picture and posted in the link
>
Well yes naturally for the residual but adding -ksp_true_residual just gives
0 KSP unpreconditioned resid norm 3.583290589961e+00 true resid norm
3.583290589961e+00 ||r(i)||/||b|| 1.e+00
1 KSP unpreconditioned resid norm 0.e+00 true resid norm
3.583290589961e+00
On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 3:43 PM Manav Bhatia wrote:
> Here are the updates. I did not find the options to make much difference
> in the results.
>
> I noticed this message in the GAMG output for cases 2, 3: HARD stop of
> coarsening on level 3. Grid too small: 1 block nodes
>
Yea, this is
These are indefinite (bad) Helmholtz problems. Right?
On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 2:38 PM Matthew Knepley wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 2:13 PM Thibaut Appel
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Mark, Matthew,
>>
>> Thanks for taking the time.
>>
>> 1) You're not suggesting having -fieldsplit_X_ksp_type *f*gmres
This is what I need ! Thank you Matt !
El El mié, 31 oct 2018 a las 19:53, Matthew Knepley
escribió:
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 1:34 PM Guido Giuntoli via petsc-users <
> petsc-users@mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
>
>> Hi, I have two codes that use PETSc. The first one is parallel and uses
>> MPI and the
Hi Mark, Matthew,
Thanks for taking the time.
1) You're not suggesting having -fieldsplit_X_ksp_type *f*gmres for each
field, are you?
2) No, the matrix *has* pressure in one of the fields. Here it's a 2D
problem (but we're also doing 3D), the unknowns are (p,u,v) and those
are my 3
Again, you probably want to avoid Cheby. with ‘-mg_levels_ksp_type
richardson -mg_levels_pc_type sor’ with the proper prefix.
I'm not sure about "-fieldsplit_pc_type gamg" GAMG should work on one
block, and hence be a subpc. I'm not up on fieldsplit syntax.
On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 9:22 AM
On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 5:23 PM Appel, Thibaut via petsc-users <
petsc-users@mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
> Dear users,
>
> Following a suggestion from Matthew Knepley I’ve been trying to apply
> fieldsplit/gamg for my set of PDEs but I’m still encountering issues
> despite various tests. pc_gamg simply
Hi Matthew,
Which database option are you referring to?
I tried to add -fieldsplit_mg_levels_ksp_type gmres (and
-fieldsplit_mg_levels_ksp_max_it 4 for another run) to my options (cf.
below) which starts the iterations but it takes 1 hour for PETSc to do
13 of them so it must be wrong.
My issue is summarized in the picture and posted in the link
https://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/30458/what-does-the-error-this-matrix-type-does-not-have-a-find-zero-diagonals-define?noredirect=1#comment56074_30458
[cid:image001.png@01D4715E.DAED5B40]
Kind regards
Wenjin
Hi Hong,
You can find the matrices here:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ejpa9owkv8tjnwi/A.petsc?dl=0
https://www.dropbox.com/s/urjtxaezl0cv3om/B.petsc?dl=0
Changing the target value leads to the same error. What is strange is that
this works without a problem on two other machines. But in my main
13 matches
Mail list logo
