<div>Jed,</div><div>Sorry for my late response.</div><div>Thank you very much.<br></div><div><br></div><div>Ilyas.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote">2011/4/24 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 Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 14:31, ilyas ilyas <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ilyascfd@gmail.com" target="_blank">ilyascfd@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div>According to this explanation, If I would set up a matrix for 3D periodic domain using DAs with DA_ XYZPERIODIC,</div><div>The code segment given below could handle periodicity "without specifying boundary information within the loop" ?</div>
</blockquote></div><br></div><div>Yes, that code is fine. PETSc translates the periodic contributions.</div>
</blockquote></div><br>