After talking with Fande, I don't think my proposal is a good one. Whereas
MatSetValues makes it clear that you must call through to
MatAssemblyBegin/MatAssemblyEnd after use, there is no such indication for
MatZeroRows. Probably most users expect to be able to go onto
preconditioning after
Especially if the user has requested to keep their nonzero pattern, is
there any harm in calling MatAssembly with FLUSH instead of FINAL? Are
there users relying on MatZeroValues being their final assembly?
On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 8:51 AM Alexander Lindsay
wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 8:46
On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 8:46 AM Fande Kong wrote:
> "if (a->keepnonzeropattern)" branch does not change ilen so that
> A->ops->assemblyend will be fine. It would help if you made sure that
> elements have been inserted for these rows before you call MatZeroRows.
>
So this is the crux of the
"if (a->keepnonzeropattern)" branch does not change ilen so that
A->ops->assemblyend will be fine. It would help if you made sure that
elements have been inserted for these rows before you call MatZeroRows.
However, I am not sure it is necessary to call A->ops->assemblyend if we
already require
Hi.
When I write (HDF5 viewer) a vector associated to a DMDA with 1 dof, the
output is independent of the number of cpus used.
However, for a DMDA with dof=2, the output seems to be correct when I
run on 1 or 2 cpus, but is scrambled when I run with 4 cpus. Judging
from the ranges of the
Alexander
Do you have a small code to reproduce the issue?
Below is the output using a PETSc example (src/mat/tests/ex11). The pattern is
kept.
kl-18448:tests szampini$ ./ex11
Mat Object: 1 MPI processes
type: seqaij
row 0: (0, 5.)
row 1: (0, -1.) (1, 4.) (2, -1.) (6, -1.)
row 2: (2,
My interpretation of the documentation page of MatZeroRows is that if I've
set MAT_KEEP_NONZERO_PATTERN to true, then my sparsity pattern shouldn't be
changed by a call to it, e.g. a->imax should not change. However, at least
for sequential matrices, MatAssemblyEnd is called with
Il 15/07/21 14:26, Matthew Knepley ha scritto:
On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 8:20 AM Matteo Semplice
mailto:matteo.sempl...@uninsubria.it>>
wrote:
Il 15/07/21 14:15, Matthew Knepley ha scritto:
On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 6:39 AM Matteo Semplice
mailto:matteo.sempl...@uninsubria.it>>
On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 8:20 AM Matteo Semplice <
matteo.sempl...@uninsubria.it> wrote:
>
> Il 15/07/21 14:15, Matthew Knepley ha scritto:
>
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 6:39 AM Matteo Semplice <
> matteo.sempl...@uninsubria.it> wrote:
>
>>
>> Il 12/07/21 17:51, Matthew Knepley ha scritto:
>>
>> On
Il 15/07/21 14:15, Matthew Knepley ha scritto:
On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 6:39 AM Matteo Semplice
mailto:matteo.sempl...@uninsubria.it>>
wrote:
Il 12/07/21 17:51, Matthew Knepley ha scritto:
On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 11:40 AM Matteo Semplice
mailto:matteo.sempl...@uninsubria.it>>
On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 6:39 AM Matteo Semplice <
matteo.sempl...@uninsubria.it> wrote:
>
> Il 12/07/21 17:51, Matthew Knepley ha scritto:
>
> On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 11:40 AM Matteo Semplice <
> matteo.sempl...@uninsubria.it> wrote:
>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> I am experimenting with hdf5+xdmf
Il 12/07/21 17:51, Matthew Knepley ha scritto:
On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 11:40 AM Matteo Semplice
mailto:matteo.sempl...@uninsubria.it>>
wrote:
Dear all,
I am experimenting with hdf5+xdmf output. At
https://www.xdmf.org/index.php/XDMF_Model_and_Format
12 matches
Mail list logo
