[petsc-dev] Subcomms

[Barry Smith]

On Jan 27, 2012, at 5:40 PM, Matthew Knepley wrote:

> 
> We can take this to dev, but would you advocate doing this by making new comms?
> 
> > I want blocks of MatNest to be able to reside on subcomms. If that happened, inner KSPs for PCFieldSplit could also move to subcomms. PCMG should be able to run coarse levels on subcomms.
> 
> This seems like an excellent source of new and confusing parallel errors. How do we control organization of
> subcomms, compatibility (checking without deadlock), and reporting? Should we maintain a relation stored
> in the communicators (comm graph), or outside?
> 
> However, I think this is the right move. 

   Is now the right time. Shouldn't we wait until MPI's replacement is working and do things with that model?

   Barry

> 
>    Matt
> 
> -- 
> 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