Question on using MUMPS in PETSC

[Matthew Knepley]

On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 5:56 PM, Randall Mackie <rlmackie862 at gmail.com> wrote:
> When m = n = small (like 50), it works fine. When I set m=n=5000, I see
> the same thing, where one process on the localhost is taking >4 G of RAM,
> while all other processes are taking 137 M.
>
> Is this the standard behavior for MUMPS? It seems strange to me.

No, this is a problem. I do not see this with ex2.

  Matt

> Randy
>
>
> Matthew Knepley wrote:
>>
>> Does it work on KSP ex2?
>>
>>  Matt
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 4:35 PM, Randall Mackie <rlmackie862 at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I've compiled PETSc with MUMPS support, and I'm trying to run a small
>>> test
>>> problem, but I'm having some problems. It seems to begin just fine, but
>>> what I notice is that on one process (out of 64), the memory just keeps
>>> going up and up and up until it crashes, while on the other processes,
>>> the memory usage is reasonable. I'm wondering if anyone might have any
>>> idea
>>> why? By the way, my command file is like this:
>>>
>>> -ksp_type preonly
>>> -pc_type lu
>>> -mat_type aijmumps
>>> -mat_mumps_cntl_4 3
>>> -mat_mumps_cntl_9 1
>>>
>>>
>>> Randy
>>>
>>> ps. This happens after the analysis stage and in the factorization stage.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>



-- 
What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their
experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to which
their experiments lead.
-- Norbert Wiener