Hi all, I tried with 3.11.1 version and Barry's fix. The good scaling is back! See the green curve in the plot attached. It is even better than PETSc 3.6! And it runs faster (10-15s instead of 200-300s with 3.6).
So you were right. It seems that not all the PtAPs used the scalable version. I was a bit confused about the options to set... I used the options: -matptap_via scalable and -mat_freeintermediatedatastructures 1. Do you think it would be even better with allatonce? It is unfortunate that this fix can't be merged with the master branch. But the patch works well and I can consider the issue as solved now. Thanks a lot for your time! Myriam Le 05/04/19 à 06:54, Smith, Barry F. a écrit : > Hmm, I had already fixed this, I think, > > > https://bitbucket.org/petsc/petsc/pull-requests/1606/change-handling-of-matptap_mpiaij_mpimaij/diff > > but unfortunately our backlog of pull requests kept it out of master. We > are (well Satish and Jed) working on a new CI infrastructure that will > hopefully be more stable than the current CI that we are using. > > Fande, > Sorry you had to spend time on this. > > > Barry > > > >> On May 3, 2019, at 11:20 PM, Fande Kong via petsc-users >> <petsc-users@mcs.anl.gov> wrote: >> >> Hi Myriam, >> >> I run the example you attached earlier with "-mx 48 -my 48 -mz 48 -levels 3 >> -ksp_view -matptap_via allatonce -log_view ". >> >> There are six PtAPs. Two of them are sill using the nonscalable version of >> the algorithm (this might explain why the memory still exponentially >> increases) even though we have asked PETSc to use the ``allatonce" >> algorithm. This is happening because MATMAIJ does not honor the petsc >> option, instead, it uses the default setting of MPIAIJ. I have a fix at >> https://bitbucket.org/petsc/petsc/pull-requests/1623/choose-algorithms-in/diff. >> The PR should fix the issue. >> >> Thanks again for your report, >> >> Fande, >> >> -- Myriam Peyrounette CNRS/IDRIS - HLST --
smime.p7s
Description: Signature cryptographique S/MIME
