[petsc-users] Need help...

[jean-frederic thebault]

Hi Matt, Hi Jed,

It seems that I didn't paid attention of some changes in realeases. I just
changed the option of my calling of MatSetOption, and now the error is
later on. then, for now, that means I will have to check all of the calling
of petsc-subroutines and check-out the change between all releases.
Sounds ok to me (means it will "work").
Many thanks and Best Regards

John

PS: when I was using the 2.1.3 version, I had a user-member-name, but I
can't remember it... I guess I will subscribe again.

2011/11/8 Matthew Knepley <knepley at gmail.com>

> On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 4:15 PM, Jed Brown <jedbrown at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
>
>>  On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 10:09, jean-frederic thebault <
>> jean-frederic at thebault-net.com> wrote:
>>
>>> First of all, thank you for this library.
>>> View years ago, we had mixed our (f77) finite volume code with petsc,
>>> and obtained some very interested results (faster calculations,
>>> multi-processor issues, ..), with a 4 linux-PC cluster and a myrinet
>>> switch, and petsc-2.1.3
>>> Regarding the new PC architecture (multi-threading), the same mixed code
>>> apparently is calculating slower each time we increase the number of
>>> processors used (processor or core, I'm not sure to use the right word). We
>>> thought that time that we should upgrade our petsc library (with
>>> petsc-3.1-p8)
>>>
>>
>> Please use petsc-3.2
>>
>>
>>> to have benefit of the multi-threading architecture. So do we, changing
>>> a little bit some stuff (merrely "include" names). We compiled it with
>>> mpif77. The fortran-samples of petsc are working just fine. But our code
>>> doesn't work. We have tried a lot of different options and tried for view
>>> weeks to figure out what is happening, nothing.
>>>
>>
> There have been 11 releases of the 9 years since 2.1.3. There have been
> more interface changes than MatSetOption(). All of them
> are catalogued here:
> http://www.mcs.anl.gov/petsc/petsc-as/documentation/changes/index.html.
> "Doesn't work" is an inadequate
> description of your problem. What happen precisely?
>
>    Matt
>
>
>>  The calling sequence for MatSetOption() has changed. You are likely
>> calling it incorrectly.
>>
>> The compiler tells you about these things in C. Fortran 77 type checking
>> is nonexistant so the compiler doesn't check these things. If you use F90
>> or later, you can turn on interface definitions to get some rudimentary
>> type checking. Type checking is much better in C.
>>
>
>
>
> --
> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20111108/1820c2e0/attachment-0001.htm>