[petsc-users] mumps freezes for bigger problems

[Hong Zhang]

Hailong:
I've never seen this type of error from MUMPS.
It seems programming bug. Are you sure smaller problem runs correctly?
Use valgrind check it.

Hong

> I got the error from MUMPS.
>
> When I run MUMPS (which requring scalapack) with matrix size (n) = 30620,
> nonzeros (nz) = 785860,
> I could run it. And could get result.
> But when I run it with
> nz=3112820
> n =61240
>
>
> I am getting the following error
>
>
> 17 - <NO ERROR MESSAGE> : Could not convert index 1140850688 into a pointer
> The index may be an incorrect argument.
> Possible sources of this problem are a missing "include 'mpif.h'",
> a misspelled MPI object (e.g., MPI_COM_WORLD instead of MPI_COMM_WORLD)
> or a misspelled user variable for an MPI object (e.g.,
> com instead of comm).
> [17] [] Aborting Program!
>
>
>
> Do you know what happened?
> Is that possible it is running out of memory?
>
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 7:15 AM, Hong Zhang <hzhang at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
>>
>> Direct solvers often require large memory for storing matrix factors.
>> As Jed suggests, you may try superlu_dist.
>>
>> With mumps, I notice you use parallel analysis, which is relative new in
>> mumps.
>> What happens if you use default sequential analysis with
>> different matrix orderings?
>> I usually use matrix ordering '-mat_mumps_icntl_7 2'.
>>
>> Also, you can increase fill ratio,
>> -mat_mumps_icntl_14 <20>: ICNTL(14): percentage of estimated workspace
>> increase (None)
>> i.e., default ration is 20, you may try 50? (I notice that you already use
>> 30).
>>
>> It seems you use 16 CPUs for "a mere couple thousands
>> elements" problems, and mumps "silently freezes". I do not have this type
>> of experience with mumps. I usually can solve sparse matrix of size
>> 10k with 1 cpu using mumps.
>> When mumps runs out of memory or gets other problems, it terminates
>> execution and dumps out error message,
>> not freezes.
>> Something is wrong here. Use a debugger and figuring out where it freezes.
>>
>> Hong
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 7:01 AM, Jed Brown <jedbrown at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
>> > -pc_type lu -pc_factor_mat_solver_package superlu_dist
>> >
>> > On Dec 21, 2011 6:19 AM, "Dominik Szczerba" <dominik at itis.ethz.ch>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I am successfully solving my indefinite systems with MUMPS but only
>> >> for very small problems. To give a feeling, a mere couple thousands
>> >> elements. If I only double the problem size, it silently freezes, even
>> >> with max verbosity via the control parameters. Did anyone succeed here
>> >> with big problems? Any recommendations for a drop-in replacement for
>> >> MUMPS?
>> >>
>> >> Thanks for any hints,
>> >> Dominik
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Options used:
>> >> -mat_mumps_icntl_4 3 -mat_mumps_icntl_28 2 -mat_mumps_icntl_29
>> >>
>> >> Output:
>> >>
>> >> ****** FACTORIZATION STEP ********
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>  GLOBAL STATISTICS PRIOR NUMERICAL FACTORIZATION ...
>> >>  NUMBER OF WORKING PROCESSES              =          16
>> >>  OUT-OF-CORE OPTION (ICNTL(22))           =           0
>> >>  REAL SPACE FOR FACTORS                   =  1438970073
>> >>  INTEGER SPACE FOR FACTORS                =    11376442
>> >>  MAXIMUM FRONTAL SIZE (ESTIMATED)         =       16868
>> >>  NUMBER OF NODES IN THE TREE              =       43676
>> >>  Convergence error after scaling for ONE-NORM (option 7/8)   = 0.21D+01
>> >>  Maximum effective relaxed size of S              =   231932340
>> >>  Average effective relaxed size of S              =   182366303
>> >>
>> >>  REDISTRIB: TOTAL DATA LOCAL/SENT         =     1509215    22859750
>> >>  GLOBAL TIME FOR MATRIX DISTRIBUTION       =      0.8270
>> >>  ** Memory relaxation parameter ( ICNTL(14)  )            :        35
>> >>  ** Rank of processor needing largest memory in facto     :         0
>> >>  ** Space in MBYTES used by this processor for facto      :      2017
>> >>  ** Avg. Space in MBYTES per working proc during facto    :      1618
>
>
>
>
> --
> Hailong