Performance degradation after upgrade to 3.0.0

[Sean Dettrick]

This problem occurs when the MS user sends an attachment to an email  
which has rich text formatting.

Format the email in plain text, attach, and try again.

S

On Feb 2, 2009, at 5:30 AM, Barry Smith wrote:

>
>   There may be some option (well hidden) in outlook web access that  
> lets you deselect winmail.dat but it is using it by default.
>
>   Barry
>
> On Feb 2, 2009, at 3:59 AM, Billy Araújo wrote:
>
>>
>> I didn't send winmail.dat.
>>
>> Maybe because was sent from outlook web access, I don't know... :)
>>
>> Billy.
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: petsc-users-bounces at mcs.anl.gov on behalf of Barry Smith
>> Sent: Sun 2/1/2009 11:24 PM
>> To: PETSc users list
>> Subject: Re: Performance degradation after upgrade to 3.0.0
>>
>>
>>   winmail.dat? Come on, be serious, we'd like to help you but not
>> all of us are chained to Bill Gates nightstand.
>>
>>    Barry
>>
>> On Feb 1, 2009, at 3:01 PM, Billy Araújo wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Here are the files that contain all the information below. You can
>>> see that the matrices are the same, unless I am missing something
>>> here. :)
>>>
>>> (I am resending them in compressed format).
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Billy.
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: petsc-users-bounces at mcs.anl.gov on behalf of Matthew Knepley
>>> Sent: Sun 2/1/2009 6:07 PM
>>> To: PETSc users list
>>> Subject: Re: Performance degradation after upgrade to 3.0.0
>>>
>>> In order to determine what is happening you first should:
>>>
>>> 1) Confirm that the solver setup is identical using -ksp_view for
>>> both versions
>>>
>>> 2) Determine that the matrices are identical. Output both matrices
>>> using
>>>    MatView() with a PetscBinaryViewer. You can diff the files, and
>>> you can also
>>>    solver both matrices using KSP ex10.
>>>
>>> 3) Look at the residuals using -ksp_monitor. If they are different,
>>> something
>>>    else has changed.
>>>
>>> Matt
>>>
>>> On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 6:32 AM, Billy Araújo <billy at dem.uminho.pt>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I have also verified that there has been a degradation of
>>>> performance using
>>>> the new 3.0 version:
>>>>
>>>> This is my function calling PETSc:
>>>>
>>>> KSP ksp;
>>>> PC pc;
>>>>
>>>> KSPCreate (PETSC_COMM_WORLD, &ksp);
>>>>
>>>> KSPSetOperators (ksp, *A, *A, DIFFERENT_NONZERO_PATTERN);
>>>>
>>>> KSPSetType (ksp, KSPFGMRES);
>>>>
>>>> KSPGetPC (ksp, &pc);
>>>>
>>>> PCSetType (pc, PrecondProc);
>>>>
>>>> KSPSetInitialGuessNonzero (ksp, PETSC_TRUE);
>>>>
>>>> KSPSetTolerances (ksp, 1E-50, maxtol, PETSC_DEFAULT, maxiter);
>>>>
>>>> KSPSetFromOptions (ksp);
>>>>
>>>> KSPSolve (ksp, *b, *x);
>>>>
>>>> KSPGetIterationNumber (ksp, iter);
>>>>
>>>> KSPGetResidualNorm (ksp, res);
>>>>
>>>> KSPDestroy (ksp);
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> with previous version 2.3.3-p6:
>>>>
>>>> Number of iterations: 42 Residual: +7.073781E-13 Time:  
>>>> +8.615024E-03
>>>>
>>>> now:
>>>>
>>>> Number of iterations: 500 Residual: +2.746161E-05 Time:  
>>>> +1.026870E-01
>>>>
>>>> It is reaching maximum number of iterations. The only thing I
>>>> changed was:
>>>>
>>>> MatSetOption (*A, MAT_SYMMETRIC);
>>>> to
>>>> MatSetOption (*A, MAT_SYMMETRIC, PETSC_TRUE);
>>>>
>>>> I think I didn't change anything else.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Billy.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>> <winmail.dat>
>>
>>
>> <winmail.dat>
>