some sor questions
Stephan Kramer
s.kramer at imperial.ac.uk
Tue Sep 22 15:37:37 CDT 2009
Thanks for your answers
Barry Smith wrote:
> On Sep 22, 2009, at 8:47 AM, Stephan Kramer wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I have some questions basically about the MatRelax_SeqAIJ routine:
>>
>> If I understand correctly there are 2 versions of the sor routine
>> depending on whether or not there is a zero guess, so that with a
>> zero guess in the forward sweep you don't need to multiply the upper
>> diagonal part U with the part of the x vector that is still zero.
>> Why then does it look like that both versions log the same number of
>> flops? I would have expected that the full forward sweep (i.e. no
>> zero guess) takes 2*a->nz flops (i.e. the same as a matvec) and not
>> a->nz.
>
> You are right. This is an error in our code. It will be in the
> next patch.
>
>> Why does the Richardson iteration with sor not take the zero guess
>> into account, i.e. why does PCApplyRichardson_SOR not set
>> SOR_ZERO_INIT_GUESS in the call to MatRelax if the Richardson ksp
>> has a zero initial guess set?
>
> This appears to be a design limitation. There is no mechanism to
> pass the information that the initial guess is zero into
> PCApplyRichardson(). We could add support for this by adding one more
> argument to PCApplyRichardson() for this information. I don't see a
> simpler way. If one is running, say 2 iterations of Richardson then
> this would be a measurable improvement in time. If one is running many
> iterations then the savings is tiny. Perhaps this support should be
> added.
I'm thinking of the application of ksp richardson with sor as a smoother
in pcmg. In which case the down smoother will have zero initial guess
(as it only acts on the residual), and there will be typicaly only 1 or
2 iterations, so the saving would be significant. Is there another way I
should set this up instead?
>
>
>
>> In parallel if you specify SOR_LOCAL_FORWARD_SWEEP or
>> SOR_LOCAL_BACKWARD_SWEEP it
>
>
>> calls MatRelax on the local part of the matrix, mat->A, with
>> its=lits and lits=PETSC_NULL (?).
>
>> However the first line of MatRelax_SeqAIJ then says: its = its*lits.
>> Is that right?
>
> This is all wrong. It should be passing 1 in, not PETSC_NULL. This
> was fixed in petsc-dev but not in petsc-3.0.0 I will fix it in
> petsc-3.0.0 and it will be in the next patch.
>
> Thanks for pointing out the problems.
>
> If you plan to use SOR a lot, you might consider switching to
> petsc-dev since I have made some improvements there. Also consider the
> Eisenstat trick preconditioner.
>
> Barry
>
>
>> Please tell me if I'm totally misunderstanding how the routine
>> works, thanks for any help.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Stephan
>>
>> --
>> Stephan Kramer <s.kramer at imperial.ac.uk>
>> Applied Modelling and Computation Group,
>> Department of Earth Science and Engineering,
>> Imperial College London
>
>
More information about the petsc-users
mailing list