On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 4:30 AM, Bao Kai <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:paeanball@gmail.com" target="_blank">paeanball@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><br></blockquote><div>HI, all, </div><div><br></div><div>I am still suffering from the slow convergence rate of the KSP solution. </div>
<div><br></div><div>I changed the code to use Petsc3.3 and then try the gamg precoditioner, the convergence rate is better, while it took more total time because it took much more time for each iteration and some extra time for pre-processing. </div>
</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Try ML to see if it has better defaults for your problem. If not, you will have to start experimenting with the solver</div><div>parameters.</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote"><div>I am wondering if there are some ways that can help me to investigate the slow convergence rate for KSP solution so that I can do some improvement. Is DMMG will be a good solution?</div>
</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>No.</div><div><br></div><div> Matt</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote">
<div>Thank you very much. </div><div><br></div><div>Best Regards, </div><div>Kai </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
Message: 2<br>
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 15:17:15 -0500<br>
From: Matthew Knepley <<a href="mailto:knepley@gmail.com" target="_blank">knepley@gmail.com</a>><br>
To: PETSc users list <<a href="mailto:petsc-users@mcs.anl.gov" target="_blank">petsc-users@mcs.anl.gov</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [petsc-users] Does this mean the matrix is<br>
ill-conditioned?<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<CAMYG4Gk7T=<a href="mailto:q%2Bw1PKO7G_TW07iDzux90Sncbv9K7d0FD-MDrLRg@mail.gmail.com" target="_blank">q+w1PKO7G_TW07iDzux90Sncbv9K7d0FD-MDrLRg@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"<br>
<br>
On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Bao Kai <<a href="mailto:paeanball@gmail.com" target="_blank">paeanball@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
> Hi, all,<br>
><br>
> The following is the output from the solution of a Poisson equation<br>
> from Darcy's law.<br>
><br>
> To compute the condition number of matrix, I did not use PC and use<br>
> GMRES KSP to do the test.<br>
><br>
> It seems like that the condition number keep increasing during the<br>
> iterative solution. Does this mean the matrix is ill-conditioned?<br>
><br>
<br>
Generally yes. Krylov methods take a long time to resolve the smallest<br>
eigenvalues, so this approximation is not great.<br>
<br>
<br>
> For this test, it did not achieve convergence with 10000 iterations.<br>
><br>
> When I use BJOCABI PC and BICGSTAB KSP, it generally takes about 600<br>
> times iteration to get the iteration convergent.<br>
><br>
> Any suggestion for improving the convergence rate will be much<br>
> appreciated. The solution of this equation has been the bottleneck of<br>
> my code, it takes more than 90% of the total time.<br>
><br>
<br>
Try ML or GAMG.<br>
<br>
Matt<br>
<br>
<br>
> Thank you very much.<br>
><br>
> Best Regards,<br>
> Kai<br>
><br>
<br><br></blockquote></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br>What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their experiments lead.<br>
-- Norbert Wiener<br>