<div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 11:29, Mark F. Adams <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mark.adams@columbia.edu">mark.adams@columbia.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
GAMG does not repartition by default anymore -- it is very expensive. GAMG does now do simple process aggregation on coarser grids if repartitioning is not specified.</blockquote></div><br><div>Couldn't we at least do some cheap (e.g. greedy) repartitioning? Or at least squish out empty ranks so that the coarser levels tend to be nearby on the network? Would it make more sense to do this or to work on a "real" partitioner.</div>