[petsc-users] Some possible bugs with PETSC_VIEWER_BINARY_?

[Matthew Knepley]

On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Sun, Hui <hus003 at ucsd.edu> wrote:

> I do have my code set up based on ex70. The reason I do this is that I
> need to use fieldsplit and schur complement. I can't find other examples
> doing that, except ex55 and ex70, however I have a hard time get ex55
> running.
>
> I don't understand what you said about "This example uses a simple
> decomposition, not what you use above". What do you mean by "simple
> decomposition"?
>

I use FieldSplit and schur on SNES ex62.

   Matt


> ________________________________________
> From: Jed Brown [jed at jedbrown.org]
> Sent: Friday, August 01, 2014 11:15 PM
> To: Sun, Hui; petsc-users at mcs.anl.gov
> Subject: Re: [petsc-users] Some possible bugs with PETSC_VIEWER_BINARY_?
>
> "Sun, Hui" <hus003 at ucsd.edu> writes:
> > Here you can see I have 4 processors running at the same time. I read in
> the output from MATLAB using the
> >
> > command [A,B,C,D,x,b,y] = PetscBinaryRead('binaryoutput').
> >
> >
> > And I visualize the variable y by the commands:
> >
> > mesh(reshape(y(20001:30000),100,100))
> >
> > mesh(reshape(y(10001:20000),100,100))
> >
> > mesh(reshape(y(1:10000),100,100))
> >
> >
> > The output plots are different from what I get if I use 1 processor.
>
> This example uses a simple decomposition, not what you use above.
>
> Note that this example was contributed and we do not endorse it as
> recommended practice.  If your code is already set up very much like
> this, it may be worth looking at, but don't write new code in this way
> because it is algorithmically constraining.
>



-- 
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/20140802/26c876ca/attachment.html>