Sorry for mistyping petsc to pestc.<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 12:03 PM, RenZhengYong <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:renzhengyong@gmail.com">renzhengyong@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Dear petsc team,<br><br>I known your excellent codes several months ago. I want to use Mumps as direct solver for multi-sources problem and BoomerAMG for real-value based iterative solver. I went though the doc of the petsc. It showed that petsc offered a easy and top interface to these two packages. So, I think if I chose the petsc as my tools, the coding work should be easier for me as only data structure of petsc should be leaned, not one for Mumps and one for Hypre. <br clear="all">
<br>Am I right? can pestc do the work Mumps and BloomAMG do? I want to get your confirm on my decision. As you said, sometimes it is important to make a correct decision and also to learn petsc should not be a short way. If petsc really do the fast direct solving and fast algebra multigrid algorithms by Mumps and BloomAMG, respectively, I think PESTC should definitely be the first choice for my following PhD project. <br>
<br>Best regards,<br><br>Zhengyong <br><br><br>-- <br>Zhengyong Ren<br>AUG Group, Institute of Geophysics<br>Department of Geoscience<br>NO H 47 Sonneggstrasse 5<br>CH-8092, Zürich, Switzerland<br>Tel: +41 44 633 37561<br>
e-mail: renzh@ethz.ch<br>Gmail: <a href="mailto:renzhengyong@gmail.com" target="_blank">renzhengyong@gmail.com</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Zhengyong Ren<br>AUG Group, Institute of Geophysics<br>Department of Geoscience<br>NO H 47 Sonneggstrasse 5<br>CH-8092, Zürich, Switzerland<br>Tel: +41 44 633 37561<br>e-mail: renzh@ethz.ch<br>
Gmail: <a href="mailto:renzhengyong@gmail.com">renzhengyong@gmail.com</a><br>