Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Improvement of the matrix sparsity pattern of DG on single core #1100

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jul 2, 2016

Conversation

yinghe616
Copy link
Contributor

This pull request contains two changes:

  1. for single core, call the make_flux_sparsity_pattern for DG with face coupling, which has less nonzero numbers; for multiple cores, call the make_flux_sparsity_pattern for DG with face coupling at every where, but it allows to use multiple processor.

  2. move the DG BP limiter to the solver.cc inside the function call of solve_advection.

@egpuckett

if (parameters.use_discontinuous_temperature_discretization
&& parameters.use_limiter_for_discontinuous_temperature_solution)
apply_limiter_to_dg_solutions(AdvectionField::temperature());

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This change is independent of the other one. Can you separate this into a different pull request?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

OK. I will do.

@bangerth
Copy link
Contributor

bangerth commented Jul 2, 2016

/run-tests

constraints, false,
Utilities::MPI::
this_mpi_process(mpi_communicator));
DoFTools::make_flux_sparsity_pattern (dof_handler,
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

you don't need to run both functions, just make_flux_sparsity_pattern should do both.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

oh, or do you need this because of the constraints?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, for the constraints. Otherwise, it gives run-error messages.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants