/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20091202/bd7a0f30/attachment.htm
___
?
http://card.mail.cn.yahoo.com/
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20091202/980951ec/attachment.htm
://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20091202/37a23483/attachment.htm
.
?
?
?
___
?
http://card.mail.cn.yahoo.com/
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20091202
Let's move this over to petsc-maint at mcs.anl.gov to cut the traffic
on petsc-users See below.
On Dec 2, 2009, at 12:33 AM, ming zhu wrote:
OK. I am now use MatGetSubMatrix.My code is as follows
PetscMalloc(n*sizeof(PetscInt),indices);
for (j = 0; j n; j++)
{
indices[j]
Hi,
The Petsc 3 manual (pdf)mentions using an optimized fortran kernel for complex
numbers, that somehow uses the same C interface. It refers to a document on
how to build these kernels, but that document does not appear to be in the
tarball (or on the anl.gov website).
Furthermore, the FAQ
The performance difference between c/c++ kernels and fortran kernels -
or c-complex/c++-complex can be compiler specific. You can build all
relavent versions [each with a different PETSC_ARCH] and see if it
makes a difference for you code.
The relavent configure options are:
Craig,
Thanks for pointing this out. I have updated the manual and
installation.html in PETSc-dev to explicitly provide this information.
Barry
On Dec 2, 2009, at 11:09 AM, Satish Balay wrote:
The performance difference between c/c++ kernels and fortran kernels -
or
