Thank You, Jed! I'll follow your advice. Now im having some problems with using nondefault viewers, but i think i can cope with it. Thanks<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2011/3/22 Jed Brown <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jed@59a2.org">jed@59a2.org</a>></span><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><div class="im"><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 10:41, Алексей Рязанов <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ram@ibrae.ac.ru" target="_blank">ram@ibrae.ac.ru</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Thank You for you answer! Yes now I can see from the output, that VecView uses natural ordering, but its also very importaint to understand where (on which processor) elements are finaly stored. If I got it in a right way, VecView uses natural ordering and gives the WRONG information about actual distribution of memory among processors.</blockquote>
</div><br></div><div>The natural ordering is different from the PETSc ordering. If you want to view the Vec in the order it is stored in, use</div><div><br></div><div>PetscViewerPushFormat(viewer,PETSC_VIEWER_NATIVE);</div>
<div>
VecView(X,viewer);</div><div>PetscViewerPopFormat(viewer);</div>
</blockquote></div><br>