Re: [petsc-users] MatCompositeMerge + MatCreateRedundantMatrix

ok, I think I understand now. I will give it a try and if there is some trouble comeback to you. thanks.   marius   On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 8:42 PM Marius Buerkle wrote: ok, so it seems there is no straight forward way to transfer data between PETSc matrices on

Re: [petsc-users] Including constrained dofs in a matrix/vector created with DMCreateXXXX()

On 2/19/19 7:40 AM, Matthew Knepley wrote: On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 1:13 AM Jordan Wagner via petsc-users mailto:petsc-users@mcs.anl.gov>> wrote: Hi, Over the past few months, I have implemented dmplex/section in my preexisting finite element code. We already had our own

[petsc-users] Using DMCOMPOSITE with TS

Hi fellow PETSc users! I am attempting to use a DMCOMPOSITE alongside TS and have run into some trouble. I'm attaching a MWE demonstrating the problem. The goal is to combine a DMDA3d for spatial data and a DMREDUNDANT for non-spatial, time-dependent fields. In the attached example, this

Re: [petsc-users] PCMGSetGalerkin() new inputs

This wasn't explained well in the commit message. The old code used the Galerkin procedure on the "Pmat" (preconditioning matrix; which may or may not be the same as the Amat) and set the result as both Amat and Pmat of the coarse grid. The new code allows you to specify. If your Amat and Pmat

[petsc-users] PCMGSetGalerkin() new inputs

Hi, I am currently comparing two codes based on PETSc. The first one uses PETSC 3.6.4 and the other one PETSc 3.10.2. I am having a look at the use of the function PCMGSetGalerkin(). With PETSc 3.6, the input is a boolean, while it is either PC_MG_GALERKIN_MAT, PC_MG_GALERKIN_PMAT or

Re: [petsc-users] saving results

On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 4:43 AM Sal Am wrote: > Hi Matthew you were right, > > The matrix I have is very ill conditioned and my supervisor gave it for > testing purposes. Having said that, I was able to solve it previously > however, for some reason it said convergence reached at e-3 even though