[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: which solving methods is more efficient to my problem.

To: petsc-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: which solving methods is more efficient to my problem.
From: RenZhengYong <renzhengyong@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 23:23:27 -0400
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; bh=fkNq0ldphfrQzPe4qI1rzf/ZouZZWj8q+oQWhXixnRE=; b=qhIgJlwp2pvGc+K7uIRUStkypkAsY9ywsUUPTkd3cLGHNvnSgTB7rz6iBuPP4qALk1oB48Yqv7Q/9ifHHl1fewrhFjqM5B1PRVuZE4UCEQBNccfGGQDeZkWn9OghOraePPzryOFuirsJOn1P8GMXJRgwVX+Cy55FqEszp2T0RHI=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=PQFh0pzLcaWUs0N7y6R7BKzEaNBashIpIBEGB4nFNFFsbgVohDXD2/io3jA0EG4A2XETTuIAgCwBu3gQkMhO+LoXKd6yzmfsIREq9v5rLfYSbwCn+HpxPod4imrqCBSP+IR1z2Ab/71S0kebRn7pVpuj8ap2wxKLFmUhC506Mto=
In-reply-to: <e7ba66e40710080856q381064cbxfb3ba03b1b67e75b@mail.gmail.com>
References: <7ff0ee010710062327i583253a8j3fd1bc6b95f62424@mail.gmail.com> <e7ba66e40710080856q381064cbxfb3ba03b1b67e75b@mail.gmail.com>
Reply-to: petsc-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: owner-petsc-users@xxxxxxxxxxx

Sorry for that. Actually, the simple linear elliptic (second order) PDE is adopted in my codes. And, my results tell me that the MG method is more preferred than CG-like solvers.

On 10/8/07, Lisandro Dalcin <dalcinl@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

You forgot to mention what kind of problem your PDE is, appart from
being linear. I mean, can you describe which kind of problem are you
trying to solve?

On 10/7/07, Yujie < recrusader@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi, everyone
>
> I am using adaptive mesh refinement to solve a group of coupled steady-state
> linear PDEs. I will use PETSC as the solver. Did anyone have experience
> in such problem. I want to know which
> solving method is more efficient, including
> iterative method and preconditioner.
> Thanks a lot.
>
> Regards,
> Yujie
>

--
Lisandro Dalcín
---------------
Centro Internacional de Métodos Computacionales en Ingeniería (CIMEC)
Instituto de Desarrollo Tecnológico para la Industria Química (INTEC)
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET)
PTLC - Güemes 3450, (3000) Santa Fe, Argentina
Tel/Fax: +54-(0)342-451.1594

--
Zhengyong Ren
School of Info-physics and Geomatics Engineering
DiXue Building, 3-322#,
Central South University, Hunan Province,China.
Postal code: 410083
Email: renzhengyong@xxxxxxxxx
Tel: +086013787102372.

References:
- which solving methods is more efficient to my problem.
  - From: Yujie
- Re: which solving methods is more efficient to my problem.
  - From: Lisandro Dalcin

Prev by Date: RE: Compiled information for Petsc 2.3.2-p10
Next by Date: Symbol SNESGetNumberLinearIterations not defined
Previous by thread: Re: which solving methods is more efficient to my problem.
Next by thread: migrating from IMSL to petsc
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread