<div dir="ltr"><p>Dear Lisandro:</p><p>Barry has tried to establish an interface for Plapack. However, there are some bugs in Plapack. Therefore, it doesn't work. I am wondering if CG in Petsc can work with parallel dense matrix. When using the same matrix, which one is faster, sequential or parallel? thanks.<br>
</p><p>Regards,</p><p>Yujie</p><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 6:51 PM, Lisandro Dalcin <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dalcinl@gmail.com">dalcinl@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
Well, any iterative solver will actually work, but expect a really<br>
poor scalability :-). I believe (never used dense matrices) that you<br>
could use a direct method (PLAPACK?), but again, be prepared for long<br>
running times if your problem is (even moderately) large.<br>
<div><div class="Wj3C7c"><br>
On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 10:35 PM, Yujie <<a href="mailto:recrusader@gmail.com">recrusader@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> To my knowledge, PETsc doesn't provide parallel dense matrix-based solvers,<br>
> such as for CG, GMRES and so on. If it is, how to deal with this problem?<br>
> Thanks.<br>
><br>
> Regards,<br>
><br>
> Yujie<br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</div></div><font color="#888888">--<br>
Lisandro Dalcín<br>
---------------<br>
Centro Internacional de Métodos Computacionales en Ingeniería (CIMEC)<br>
Instituto de Desarrollo Tecnológico para la Industria Química (INTEC)<br>
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET)<br>
PTLC - Güemes 3450, (3000) Santa Fe, Argentina<br>
Tel/Fax: +54-(0)342-451.1594<br>
<br>
</font></blockquote></div><br></div>