[petsc-users] Composite shell preconditiner

[Alexander Grayver]

Jed,

I do see the drawbacks of this method, but it seems to have good 
scalability.
That I want to test.

Thank you.

On 17.08.2012 16:32, Jed Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 9:23 AM, Alexander Grayver 
> <agrayver at gfz-potsdam.de <mailto:agrayver at gfz-potsdam.de>> wrote:
>
>     Right.
>     Could you please explain what do you mean by fragile?
>
>
> Fragile means unreliable. The math is not right for Krylov methods in 
> general. You are relying on side-effects of particular methods and 
> preconditioner side combinations. Fragile is the opposite of "robust". 
> For a "robust" method, you should start with a compatible 
> discretization and/or choose a preconditioner that is stable on the 
> quasi-null space and/or filter in a way that is consistent with the 
> Krylov method (e.g. as described using FGMRES).
>
>>
>>         Looks a bit tricky. The number of fgmres iterations then
>>         defines number of the cycles correction will be applied,
>>         doesn't it?
>>
>>
>>     Yes.
>
>     If I do this command line only setup:
>
>     -pc_type composite -pc_composite_type multiplicative
>     -pc_composite_pcs ksp,shell
>
>     How does petsc know what ShellPCApply routine to take? I guess I
>     have to specify this in the code anyway?
>
>
> Yeah, to select your preconditioner in this way, you should name it 
> preconditioner something meaningful and use PCRegisterDynamic() just 
> like the native implementations.


-- 
Regards,
Alexander

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20120817/05650d90/attachment.html>