<div dir="ltr">Thanks Jed. Then I should be doing something wrong. I'm trying a simple graph and counting the number of edge cuts manually but the numbers don't match. I'll keep looking into it. <div><br></div>
<div>Mohammad<br><div><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 4:22 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="gmail_quote"><div class="im">On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 18:17, Mohammad Mirzadeh <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mirzadeh@gmail.com" target="_blank">mirzadeh@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>When using -mat_partitioning_view flag, PETSc reports number of edge cuts. Is this the number of edge cuts in the graph for the new partitioning (i.e. using new global numbering)? </div></blockquote><div><br></div></div>
<div>
yes</div><div class="im"><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div><br></div><div>Also, does the partitioning favors minimizing the edge cuts over having equal number of points per processor? If so, how can this be altered?</div></blockquote></div></div><br><div>Metis and ParMetis balance the partitions "equally" (within 1 vertex), then tries to minimize the edge cut. Assuming that is the partitioner you are using, that is what you will get.</div>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div></div>