[petsc-users] matrix reordering

[Jed Brown]

_You_ can compute a MatOrdering, MatPermute and VecPermute, solve, and
permute back. Profile and if the solve is faster, go ahead and lift the
ordering code back into your mesh.

On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 5:48 PM, Mohammad Mirzadeh <mirzadeh at gmail.com>wrote:

> Thanks Barry. I think I agree with you that right way to do it is through
> mesh setup. As a matter of fact I have done that for some of my problems.
> Yet, I can think of situations where that kind of support might be
> beneficial, especially if someone (a.k.a me in this case!) is looking for a
> 'dirty and fast' fix.
>
> Anyway, I still believe that in long term, one should do the partitioning
> in a pre-processing step anyways and so there may not be much incentive for
> adding such a support.
>
> Thanks again,
> Mohammad
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 3:00 PM, Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
>
>>
>>    Mohammad,
>>
>>      We've thought about adding this kind of support this over the years
>> but always came to the conclusion that "the right way to do it" is during
>> the mesh setup step.
>>
>>    Barry
>>
>>
>> On Oct 19, 2012, at 4:16 PM, Mohammad Mirzadeh <mirzadeh at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi guys,
>> >
>> > Quick question. *After* the matrix is setup, is it possible to ask
>> PETSc to renumber the nodes internally in the KSPSolve phase to minimize
>> communications for MatMul inside the solver? Can I use the MatPartitioning
>> object for this or is that only intended to partition the mesh as a
>> pre-processing step?
>> >
>> > Thanks
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20121019/e3a39862/attachment.html>