[petsc-users] matrix reordering

[Mohammad Mirzadeh]

Cool. Jed, could you please point me to an example/tutorial for this? I'm
going to give it a shot.

Thanks

On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 3:57 PM, Jed Brown <jedbrown at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:

> _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/20121019/1e9bd615/attachment.html>