I know about the efficiency and scalability of modern linear methods and I don't really want to pass memory in a inefficient manner.<br>But here I need to test my designed matrix and know what PETSc brings out in a dense format to check my procedure.<br>
<br>Thanks,<br>Behzad<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 7:36 PM, Jed Brown <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jedbrown@mcs.anl.gov">jedbrown@mcs.anl.gov</a>></span> wrote:<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 Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 10:44, behzad baghapour <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:behzad.baghapour@gmail.com" target="_blank">behzad.baghapour@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
I test MatGetArray( Mat A, PetscScalar* a ) but I couldnt find the correct content of matrix by using a[i*n+j].</blockquote></div><br></div><div>The moment you ask for such a grotesque thing, you have thrown in the towel and given up any chance of a moderately scalable method (in memory or time).</div>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>==================================<br>Behzad Baghapour<br>Ph.D. Candidate, Mechecanical Engineering<br>University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran<br><a href="https://sites.google.com/site/behzadbaghapour" target="_blank">https://sites.google.com/site/behzadbaghapour</a><br>
Fax: 0098-21-88020741<br>==================================<br><br>