<div dir="ltr">Sherry,<div><br></div><div>I can repeat hang using petsc/src/ksp/ksp/examples/tutorials/ex10.c:</div><div>mpiexec -n 4 ./ex10 -f0 /homes/hzhang/tmp/Amat_binary.m -rhs 0 -pc_type lu -pc_factor_mat_solver_package superlu_dist -mat_superlu_dist_parsymbfact<br></div><div>...</div><div><div>.. Starting with 1 OpenMP threads</div><div>[0] .. BIG U size 1342464</div><div>[0] .. BIG V size 131072</div><div> Max row size is 1311</div><div> Using buffer_size of 5000000</div><div> Threads per process 1</div></div><div>...</div><div><br></div><div>using a debugger (with petsc option '-start_in_debugger'), I find that hang occurs at</div><div><div>#0 0x00007f117d870998 in __GI___poll (fds=0x20da750, nfds=4, </div><div> timeout=<optimized out>, timeout@entry=-1)</div><div> at ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/poll.c:83</div><div>#1 0x00007f117de9f7de in MPIDU_Sock_wait (sock_set=0x20da550, </div><div> millisecond_timeout=millisecond_timeout@entry=-1, </div><div> eventp=eventp@entry=0x7fff654930b0)</div><div> at src/mpid/common/sock/poll/sock_wait.i:123</div><div>#2 0x00007f117de898b8 in MPIDI_CH3i_Progress_wait (</div><div> progress_state=0x7fff65493120)</div><div> at src/mpid/ch3/channels/sock/src/ch3_progress.c:218</div><div>#3 MPIDI_CH3I_Progress (blocking=blocking@entry=1, </div><div> state=state@entry=0x7fff65493120)</div><div> at src/mpid/ch3/channels/sock/src/ch3_progress.c:921</div><div>#4 0x00007f117de1a559 in MPIR_Wait_impl (request=request@entry=0x262df90, </div><div> status=status@entry=0x7fff65493390) at src/mpi/pt2pt/wait.c:67</div><div>#5 0x00007f117de1a818 in PMPI_Wait (request=0x262df90, status=0x7fff65493390)</div><div> at src/mpi/pt2pt/wait.c:168</div><div>#6 0x00007f11831da557 in pzgstrf (options=0x23dfda0, m=4900, n=4900, </div><div> anorm=13.738475134194639, LUstruct=0x23dfe78, grid=0x23dfd78, </div><div> stat=0x7fff65493ea0, info=0x7fff65493edc) at pzgstrf.c:1308</div><div><br></div><div>#7 0x00007f11831bf3bd in pzgssvx (options=0x23dfda0, A=0x23dfe30, </div><div> ScalePermstruct=0x23dfe50, B=0x0, ldb=1225, nrhs=0, grid=0x23dfd78, </div><div> LUstruct=0x23dfe78, SOLVEstruct=0x23dfe98, berr=0x0, stat=0x7fff65493ea0, </div><div>---Type <return> to continue, or q <return> to quit---</div><div> info=0x7fff65493edc) at pzgssvx.c:1063</div><div><br></div><div>#8 0x00007f11825c2340 in MatLUFactorNumeric_SuperLU_DIST (F=0x23a0110, </div><div> A=0x21bb7e0, info=0x2355068)</div><div> at /sandbox/hzhang/petsc/src/mat/impls/aij/mpi/superlu_dist/superlu_dist.c:411</div><div>#9 0x00007f1181c6c567 in MatLUFactorNumeric (fact=0x23a0110, mat=0x21bb7e0, </div><div> info=0x2355068) at /sandbox/hzhang/petsc/src/mat/interface/matrix.c:2946</div><div>#10 0x00007f1182a56489 in PCSetUp_LU (pc=0x2353a10)</div><div> at /sandbox/hzhang/petsc/src/ksp/pc/impls/factor/lu/lu.c:152</div><div>#11 0x00007f1182b16f24 in PCSetUp (pc=0x2353a10)</div><div> at /sandbox/hzhang/petsc/src/ksp/pc/interface/precon.c:983</div><div>#12 0x00007f1182be61b5 in KSPSetUp (ksp=0x232c2a0)</div><div> at /sandbox/hzhang/petsc/src/ksp/ksp/interface/itfunc.c:332</div><div>#13 0x0000000000405a31 in main (argc=11, args=0x7fff65499578)</div><div> at /sandbox/hzhang/petsc/src/ksp/ksp/examples/tutorials/ex10.c:312</div></div><div><br></div><div>You may take a look at it. Sequential symbolic factorization works fine.</div><div><br></div><div>Why superlu_dist (v4.0) in complex precision displays</div><div><br></div><div><div>.. Starting with 1 OpenMP threads</div><div>[0] .. BIG U size 1342464</div><div>[0] .. BIG V size 131072</div><div> Max row size is 1311</div><div> Using buffer_size of 5000000</div><div> Threads per process 1</div></div><div>...</div><div><br></div><div>I realize that I use superlu_dist v4.0. Would v4.1 works? I'll give it a try tomorrow.</div><div><br></div><div>Hong</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 1:25 PM, Anthony Paul Haas <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:aph@email.arizona.edu" target="_blank">aph@email.arizona.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Hi Hong,<div><br></div><div>No that is not the correct matrix. Note that I forgot to mention that it is a complex matrix. I tried loading the matrix I sent you this morning with:<span class=""><br><br>
!...Load a Matrix in Binary Format<br></span>
call PetscViewerBinaryOpen(PETSC_COMM_WORLD,"Amat_binary.m",FILE_MODE_READ,viewer,ierr)<br>
call MatCreate(PETSC_COMM_WORLD,DLOAD,ierr)<br>
call MatSetType(DLOAD,MATAIJ,ierr)<br>
call MatLoad(DLOAD,viewer,ierr)<br>
call PetscViewerDestroy(viewer,ierr)<br>
<br>
call MatView(DLOAD,PETSC_VIEWER_STDOUT_WORLD,ierr)<br><br></div><div>The first 37 rows should look like this:<br></div><div><br>Mat Object: 2 MPI processes<br> type: mpiaij<br>row 0: (0, 1) <br>row 1: (1, 1) <br>row 2: (2, 1) <br>row 3: (3, 1) <br>row 4: (4, 1) <br>row 5: (5, 1) <br>row 6: (6, 1) <br>row 7: (7, 1) <br>row 8: (8, 1) <br>row 9: (9, 1) <br>row 10: (10, 1) <br>row 11: (11, 1) <br>row 12: (12, 1) <br>row 13: (13, 1) <br>row 14: (14, 1) <br>row 15: (15, 1) <br>row 16: (16, 1) <br>row 17: (17, 1) <br>row 18: (18, 1) <br>row 19: (19, 1) <br>row 20: (20, 1) <br>row 21: (21, 1) <br>row 22: (22, 1) <br>row 23: (23, 1) <br>row 24: (24, 1) <br>row 25: (25, 1) <br>row 26: (26, 1) <br>row 27: (27, 1) <br>row 28: (28, 1) <br>row 29: (29, 1) <br>row 30: (30, 1) <br>row 31: (31, 1) <br>row 32: (32, 1) <br>row 33: (33, 1) <br>row 34: (34, 1) <br>row 35: (35, 1) <br>row 36: (1, -41.2444) (35, -41.2444) (36, 118.049 - 0.999271 i) (37, -21.447) (38, 5.18873) (39, -2.34856) (40, 1.3607) (41, -0.898206) (42, 0.642715) (43, -0.48593) (44, 0.382471) (45, -0.310476) (46, 0.258302) (47, -0.219268) (48, 0.189304) (49, -0.165815) (50, 0.147076) (51, -0.131907) (52, 0.119478) (53, -0.109189) (54, 0.1006) (55, -0.0933795) (56, 0.0872779) (57, -0.0821019) (58, 0.0777011) (59, -0.0739575) (60, 0.0707775) (61, -0.0680868) (62, 0.0658258) (63, -0.0639473) (64, 0.0624137) (65, -0.0611954) (66, 0.0602698) (67, -0.0596202) (68, 0.0592349) (69, -0.0295536) (71, -21.447) (106, 5.18873) (141, -2.34856) (176, 1.3607) (211, -0.898206) (246, 0.642715) (281, -0.48593) (316, 0.382471) (351, -0.310476) (386, 0.258302) (421, -0.219268) (456, 0.189304) (491, -0.165815) (526, 0.147076) (561, -0.131907) (596, 0.119478) (631, -0.109189) (666, 0.1006) (701, -0.0933795) (736, 0.0872779) (771, -0.0821019) (806, 0.0777011) (841, -0.0739575) (876, 0.0707775) (911, -0.0680868) (946, 0.0658258) (981, -0.0639473) (1016, 0.0624137) (1051, -0.0611954) (1086, 0.0602698) (1121, -0.0596202) (1156, 0.0592349) (1191, -0.0295536) (1261, 0) (3676, 117.211) (3711, -58.4801) (3746, -78.3633) (3781, 29.4911) (3816, -15.8073) (3851, 9.94324) (3886, -6.87205) (3921, 5.05774) (3956, -3.89521) (3991, 3.10522) (4026, -2.54388) (4061, 2.13082) (4096, -1.8182) (4131, 1.57606) (4166, -1.38491) (4201, 1.23155) (4236, -1.10685) (4271, 1.00428) (4306, -0.919116) (4341, 0.847829) (4376, -0.787776) (4411, 0.736933) (4446, -0.693735) (4481, 0.656958) (4516, -0.625638) (4551, 0.599007) (4586, -0.576454) (4621, 0.557491) (4656, -0.541726) (4691, 0.528849) (4726, -0.518617) (4761, 0.51084) (4796, -0.50538) (4831, 0.502142) (4866, -0.250534) <br></div><div><br><br></div><div>Thanks,<br></div><div><br></div><div>Anthony</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote"><span class="">On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 7:56 PM, Hong <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:hzhang@mcs.anl.gov" target="_blank">hzhang@mcs.anl.gov</a>></span> wrote:<br></span><div><div class="h5"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">Anthony:</div><div class="gmail_quote">I test your Amat_binary.m using petsc/src/ksp/ksp/examples/tutorials/ex10.c. </div><div class="gmail_quote">Your matrix has many zero rows:</div><div class="gmail_quote">./ex10 -f0 ~/tmp/Amat_binary.m -rhs 0 -mat_view |more<br></div><div class="gmail_quote"><div class="gmail_quote">Mat Object: 1 MPI processes</div><div class="gmail_quote"> type: seqaij</div><div class="gmail_quote">row 0: (0, 1)</div><div class="gmail_quote">row 1: (1, 0)</div><div class="gmail_quote">row 2: (2, 1)</div><div class="gmail_quote">row 3: (3, 0)</div><div class="gmail_quote">row 4: (4, 1)</div><div class="gmail_quote">row 5: (5, 0)</div><div class="gmail_quote">row 6: (6, 1)</div><div class="gmail_quote">row 7: (7, 0)</div><div class="gmail_quote">row 8: (8, 1)</div><div class="gmail_quote">row 9: (9, 0)</div><div class="gmail_quote">...</div><div class="gmail_quote"><div class="gmail_quote">row 36: (1, 1) (35, 0) (36, 1) (37, 0) (38, 1) (39, 0) (40, 1) (41, 0) (42, 1) (43, 0) (44, 1) (45,</div><div class="gmail_quote">0) (46, 1) (47, 0) (48, 1) (49, 0) (50, 1) (51, 0) (52, 1) (53, 0) (54, 1) (55, 0) (56, 1) (57, 0)</div><div class="gmail_quote"> (58, 1) (59, 0) (60, 1) ...</div><div class="gmail_quote"><br></div><div class="gmail_quote">Do you send us correct matrix?</div></div></div><div class="gmail_quote"><span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"><div><br>
I ran my code through valgrind and gdb as suggested by Barry. I am
now coming back to some problem I have had while running with
parallel symbolic factorization. I am attaching a test matrix
(petsc binary format) that I LU decompose and then use to solve a
linear system (see code below). I can run on 2 processors with
parsymbfact or with 4 processors without parsymbfact. However, if
I run on 4 procs with parsymbfact, the code is just hanging. Below
is the simplified test case that I have used to test. The matrix A
and B are built somewhere else in my program. The matrix I am
attaching is A-sigma*B (see below).<br>
<br>
One thing is that I don't know for sparse matrices what is the
optimum number of processors to use for a LU decomposition? Does
it depend on the total number of nonzero? Do you have an easy way
to compute it?<br></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div></span><div>You have to experiment your matrix on a target machine to find out. </div><span><font color="#888888"><div><br></div><div>Hong</div></font></span><div><div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"><div>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Subroutine HowBigLUCanBe(rank)<br>
<br>
IMPLICIT NONE<br>
<br>
integer(i4b),intent(in) :: rank<br>
integer(i4b) :: i,ct<br>
real(dp) :: begin,endd <br>
complex(dpc) :: sigma<br>
<br>
PetscErrorCode ierr <br>
<br>
<br>
if (rank==0) call cpu_time(begin)<br>
<br>
if (rank==0) then<br>
write(*,*)<br>
write(*,*)'Testing How Big LU Can Be...'<br>
write(*,*)'============================'<br>
write(*,*)<br>
endif<br>
<br>
sigma = (1.0d0,0.0d0)<span><br>
call MatAXPY(A,-sigma,B,DIFFERENT_NONZERO_PATTERN,ierr) ! on
exit A = A-sigma*B<br>
<br></span>
!.....Write Matrix to ASCII and Binary Format<br>
!call
PetscViewerASCIIOpen(PETSC_COMM_WORLD,"Amat.m",viewer,ierr)<br>
!call MatView(DXX,viewer,ierr)<br>
!call PetscViewerDestroy(viewer,ierr)<br>
<br>
call
PetscViewerBinaryOpen(PETSC_COMM_WORLD,"Amat_binary.m",FILE_MODE_WRITE,viewer,ierr)<br>
call MatView(A,viewer,ierr)<br>
call PetscViewerDestroy(viewer,ierr)<br>
<br>
!.....Create Linear Solver Context<br>
call KSPCreate(PETSC_COMM_WORLD,ksp,ierr)<br>
<br>
!.....Set operators. Here the matrix that defines the linear
system also serves as the preconditioning matrix.<span><br>
!call
KSPSetOperators(ksp,A,A,DIFFERENT_NONZERO_PATTERN,ierr) !aha
commented and replaced by next line<br></span><span>
call KSPSetOperators(ksp,A,A,ierr) ! remember: here A =
A-sigma*B<br>
<br></span>
!.....Set Relative and Absolute Tolerances and Uses Default for
Divergence Tol<br>
tol = 1.e-10 <br>
call
KSPSetTolerances(ksp,tol,tol,PETSC_DEFAULT_REAL,PETSC_DEFAULT_INTEGER,ierr)<br>
<br>
!.....Set the Direct (LU) Solver<span><br>
call KSPSetType(ksp,KSPPREONLY,ierr)<br>
call KSPGetPC(ksp,pc,ierr)<br>
call PCSetType(pc,PCLU,ierr)<br></span><span>
call
PCFactorSetMatSolverPackage(pc,MATSOLVERSUPERLU_DIST,ierr) !
MATSOLVERSUPERLU_DIST MATSOLVERMUMPS<br>
<br></span>
!.....Create Right-Hand-Side Vector<br>
call MatCreateVecs(A,frhs,PETSC_NULL_OBJECT,ierr)<br>
call MatCreateVecs(A,sol,PETSC_NULL_OBJECT,ierr)<br>
<br>
allocate(xwork1(IendA-IstartA))<br>
allocate(loc(IendA-IstartA))<br>
<br>
ct=0<br>
do i=IstartA,IendA-1<br>
ct=ct+1<br>
loc(ct)=i<br>
xwork1(ct)=(1.0d0,0.0d0)<br>
enddo<br>
<br>
call
VecSetValues(frhs,IendA-IstartA,loc,xwork1,INSERT_VALUES,ierr)<br>
call VecZeroEntries(sol,ierr)<br>
<br>
deallocate(xwork1,loc)<br>
<br>
!.....Assemble Vectors<br>
call VecAssemblyBegin(frhs,ierr)<br>
call VecAssemblyEnd(frhs,ierr)<br>
<br>
!.....Solve the Linear System<br>
call KSPSolve(ksp,frhs,sol,ierr)<br>
<br>
!call VecView(sol,PETSC_VIEWER_STDOUT_WORLD,ierr)<br>
<br>
if (rank==0) then <br>
call cpu_time(endd)<br>
write(*,*)<br>
print '("Total time for HowBigLUCanBe = ",f21.3,"
seconds.")',endd-begin<br>
endif<br>
<br>
call SlepcFinalize(ierr)<br>
<br>
STOP<br>
<br>
<br>
end Subroutine HowBigLUCanBe<div><div><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 07/08/2015 11:23 AM, Xiaoye S. Li wrote:<br>
</div></div></div><div><div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">Indeed, the
parallel symbolic factorization routine needs power of 2
processes, however, you can use however many processes you
need; internally, we redistribute matrix to nearest power of
2 processes, do symbolic, then redistribute back to all the
processes to do factorization, triangular solve etc. So,
there is no restriction from the users viewpoint.<br>
<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">It's difficult
to tell what the problem is. Do you think you can print your
matrix, then, I can do some debugging by running superlu_dist
standalone?<br>
<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">Sherry<br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 10:34 AM,
Anthony Paul Haas <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:aph@email.arizona.edu" target="_blank">aph@email.arizona.edu</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>Hi,<br>
<br>
</div>
I have used the switch -mat_superlu_dist_parsymbfact
in my pbs script. However, although my program
worked fine with sequential symbolic factorization,
I get one of the following 2 behaviors when I run
with parallel symbolic factorization (depending on
the number of processors that I use):<br>
<br>
</div>
1) the program just hangs (it seems stuck in some
subroutine ==> see test.out-hangs)<br>
</div>
2) I get a floating point exception ==> see
test.out-floating-point-exception<br>
<br>
</div>
<div>Note that as suggested in the Superlu manual, I use a
power of 2 number of procs. Are there any tunable
parameters for the parallel symbolic factorization? Note
that when I build my sparse matrix, most elements I add
are nonzero of course but to simplify the programming, I
also add a few zero elements in the sparse matrix. I was
thinking that maybe if the parallel symbolic
factorization proceed by block, there could be some
blocks where the pivot would be zero, hence creating the
FPE??<br>
<br>
</div>
<div>Thanks,<br>
<br>
</div>
<div>Anthony<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<br>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 6:46
AM, Xiaoye S. Li <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:xsli@lbl.gov" target="_blank">xsli@lbl.gov</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">Did
you find out how to change option to use
parallel symbolic factorization? Perhaps
PETSc team can help. </div>
<div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">Sherry</div>
<div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Jul 7, 2015
at 3:58 PM, Xiaoye S. Li <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:xsli@lbl.gov" target="_blank">xsli@lbl.gov</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">Is
there an inquiry function that tells
you all the available options?<br>
<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">Sherry<br>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Tue,
Jul 7, 2015 at 3:25 PM, Anthony
Paul Haas <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:aph@email.arizona.edu" target="_blank">aph@email.arizona.edu</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>Hi Sherry,<br>
<br>
</div>
<div>Thanks for your
message. I have
used superlu_dist
default options. I
did not realize
that I was doing
serial symbolic
factorization.
That is probably
the cause of my
problem. <br>
</div>
Each node on Garnet
has 60GB usable
memory and I can run
with 1,2,4,8,16 or
32 core per node. <br>
<br>
</div>
So I should use: <br>
<br>
-mat_superlu_dist_r 20<br>
-mat_superlu_dist_c 32<b><br>
<br>
</b></div>
How do you specify the
parallel symbolic
factorization option? is
it
-mat_superlu_dist_matinput
1<b><br>
<br>
</b></div>
Thanks,<br>
<br>
</div>
Anthony<br>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On
Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at
3:08 PM, Xiaoye S. Li
<span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:xsli@lbl.gov" target="_blank">xsli@lbl.gov</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">For superlu_dist failure,
this occurs
during symbolic
factorization.
Since you are
using serial
symbolic
factorization,
it requires the
entire graph of
A to be
available in the
memory of one
MPI task. How
much memory do
you have for
each MPI task?<br>
<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">It won't help even if you
use more
processes. You
should try to
use parallel
symbolic
factorization
option.<br>
<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">Another point. You set
up process grid
as:<br>
Process
grid nprow 32 x
npcol 20 <br>
</div>
<div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">For better performance,
you show swap
the grid
dimension. That
is, it's better
to use 20 x 32,
never gives
nprow larger
than npcol.<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">Sherry<br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote"><span>On
Tue, Jul 7,
2015 at 1:27
PM, Barry
Smith <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:bsmith@mcs.anl.gov" target="_blank">bsmith@mcs.anl.gov</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
</span>
<div>
<div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>
I would
suggest
running a
sequence of
problems, 101
by 101 111 by
111 etc and
get the memory
usage in each
case (when you
run out of
memory you can
get NO useful
information
out about
memory needs).
You can then
plot memory
usage as a
function of
problem size
to get a
handle on how
much memory it
is using. You
can also run
on more and
more processes
(which have a
total of more
memory) to see
how large a
problem you
may be able to
reach.<br>
<br>
MUMPS also
has an "out of
core" version
(which we have
never used)
that could in
theory anyways
let you get to
large problems
if you have
lots of disk
space, but you
are on your
own figuring
out how to use
it.<br>
<br>
Barry<br>
<div>
<div><br>
> On Jul 7,
2015, at 2:37
PM, Anthony
Paul Haas <<a href="mailto:aph@email.arizona.edu" target="_blank">aph@email.arizona.edu</a>>
wrote:<br>
><br>
> Hi Jose,<br>
><br>
> In my
code, I use
once PETSc to
solve a linear
system to get
the baseflow
(without using
SLEPc) and
then I use
SLEPc to do
the stability
analysis of
that baseflow.
This is why,
there are some
SLEPc options
that are not
used in
test.out-superlu_dist-151x151
(when I am
solving for
the baseflow
with PETSc
only). I have
attached a
101x101 case
for which I
get the
eigenvalues.
That case
works fine.
However If i
increase to
151x151, I get
the error that
you can see in
test.out-superlu_dist-151x151
(similar error
with mumps:
see
test.out-mumps-151x151
line 2918 ).
If you look a
the very end
of the files
test.out-superlu_dist-151x151
and
test.out-mumps-151x151,
you will see
that the last
info message
printed is:<br>
><br>
> On
Processor
(after
EPSSetFromOptions)
0 memory:
0.65073152000E+08
=====>
(see line 807
of
module_petsc.F90)<br>
><br>
> This
means that the
memory error
probably
occurs in the
call to
EPSSolve (see
module_petsc.F90
line 810). I
would like to
evaluate how
much memory is
required by
the most
memory
intensive
operation
within
EPSSolve.
Since I am
solving a
generalized
EVP, I would
imagine that
it would be
the LU
decomposition.
But is there
an accurate
way of doing
it?<br>
><br>
> Before
starting with
iterative
solvers, I
would like to
exploit as
much as I can
direct
solvers. I
tried GMRES
with default
preconditioner
at some point
but I had
convergence
problem. What
solver/preconditioner
would you
recommend for
a generalized
non-Hermitian
(EPS_GNHEP)
EVP?<br>
><br>
> Thanks,<br>
><br>
> Anthony<br>
><br>
> On Tue,
Jul 7, 2015 at
12:17 AM, Jose
E. Roman <<a href="mailto:jroman@dsic.upv.es" target="_blank">jroman@dsic.upv.es</a>>
wrote:<br>
><br>
> El
07/07/2015, a
las 02:33,
Anthony Haas
escribió:<br>
><br>
> > Hi,<br>
> ><br>
> > I am
computing
eigenvalues
using
PETSc/SLEPc
and
superlu_dist
for the LU
decomposition
(my problem is
a generalized
eigenvalue
problem). The
code runs fine
for a grid
with 101x101
but when I
increase to
151x151, I get
the following
error:<br>
> ><br>
> >
Can't expand
MemType 1:
jcol 16104
(and then
[NID 00037]
2015-07-06
19:19:17 Apid
31025976: OOM
killer
terminated
this process.)<br>
> ><br>
> > It
seems to be a
memory
problem. I
monitor the
memory usage
as far as I
can and it
seems that
memory usage
is pretty low.
The most
memory
intensive part
of the program
is probably
the LU
decomposition
in the context
of the
generalized
EVP. Is there
a way to
evaluate how
much memory
will be
required for
that step? I
am currently
running the
debug version
of the code
which I would
assume would
use more
memory?<br>
> ><br>
> > I
have attached
the output of
the job. Note
that the
program uses
twice PETSc:
1) to solve a
linear system
for which no
problem
occurs, and,
2) to solve
the
Generalized
EVP with
SLEPc, where I
get the error.<br>
> ><br>
> >
Thanks<br>
> ><br>
> >
Anthony<br>
> >
<test.out-superlu_dist-151x151><br>
><br>
> In the
output you are
attaching
there are no
SLEPc objects
in the report
and SLEPc
options are
not used. It
seems that
SLEPc calls
are skipped?<br>
><br>
> Do you
get the same
error with
MUMPS? Have
you tried to
solve linear
systems with a
preconditioned
iterative
solver?<br>
><br>
> Jose<br>
><br>
><br>
</div>
</div>
>
<module_petsc.F90><test.out-mumps-151x151><test.out_superlu_dist-101x101><test.out-superlu_dist-151x151><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div></div></div>
</blockquote></div></div></div><br></div></div>
</blockquote></div></div></div><br></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>