Hi Hong,
According to this PR
https://bitbucket.org/petsc/petsc/pull-requests/1061/a_selinger-feature-faster-scalable/diff
Should we set the scalable algorithm as default?
Thanks,
Fande Kong,
On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 10:34 AM Zhang, Hong via petsc-users <
petsc-users@mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
> Add
MatPtAP_MPIAIJ_MPIAIJ(). It switches to scalable automatically for
>> "large" problems, which is determined by some heuristic.
>>
>>Barry
>>
>>
>> > On Dec 20, 2018, at 6:46 PM, Fande Kong via petsc-users <
>> petsc-users@mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
>&
> force scalable PtAP implementation for all PtAP. Let me know if it works.
>>> Hong
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 8:16 PM Smith, Barry F.
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> See MatPtAP_MPIAIJ_MPIAIJ(). It switches to scalable automatically
>>
use option '-matptap_via scalable'
>>>>> to force scalable PtAP implementation for all PtAP. Let me know if it
>>>>> works.
>>>>> Hong
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 8:16 PM Smith, Barry F.
>>>>>
Hi All,
The second parameter is changed from PetscDataType to MPI_Datatype starting
from PETSc-3.9.x
Thanks,
Fande Kong,
not have anything to do with MPI.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Fande,
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 3:22 PM Matthew Knepley
>> wrote:
>>
>>> We are trying to eliminate PetscDataType.
>>>
>>> Matt
>>>
>>> On
Hi All,
Since PetscTable will be replaced by khash in the future somehow, it is
better to use khash for new implementations. I was wondering where I can
find some examples that use khash? Do we have any petsc wrappers of khash?
Thanks,
Fande,
On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 10:24 AM Matthew Knepley via petsc-users <
petsc-users@mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 10:22 AM Yingjie Wu via petsc-users <
> petsc-users@mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
>
>> Dear PETSc developers:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've been using -snes_mf_operator and I've customized a
d of
> TARGET_MAGNITUDE we set LARGEST_MAGNITUDE, and in Jacobi-Davidson we treat
> this case by setting sigma=PETSC_MAX_REAL. In this case, the preconditioner
> is built from matrix B. The thing is that in a standard eigenproblem we
> have B=I, and hence there is no point in using a pre