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

ECP 14: in situ matrix modifications #10

Closed
spdomin opened this issue Oct 7, 2016 · 5 comments
Closed

ECP 14: in situ matrix modifications #10

spdomin opened this issue Oct 7, 2016 · 5 comments
Assignees

Comments

@spdomin
Copy link
Contributor

spdomin commented Oct 7, 2016

Activities:

  1. Establish local row- and column-maps for dofs only at moving mesh interfaces.
  2. Modify matrix assembly to exploit locally changed matrix maps.
  3. Work with Tpetra team to allow for in situ matrix modifications.
@spdomin spdomin added this to the FY20Q2 milestone Oct 7, 2016
@alanw0
Copy link
Contributor

alanw0 commented Oct 10, 2016

Some combination of steps 1 and 2 probably do have the potential to improve performance on our side, without initially requiring Tpetra changes. That would then allow us plenty of lead time to collaborate with the Tpetra folks to stage in some enhancements in priority order, driven by good performance data.

@spdomin
Copy link
Contributor Author

spdomin commented Oct 11, 2016

@mhoemmen; this is a long term ECP requirement on Tpetra that we may need elevated to the Trilinos backlog if it gets too deep for the team. Hopefully, this is a synergistic activity that other application teams require. You can see that we have some time to get this done...

@mhoemmen
Copy link

@spdomin wrote:

Establish local row- and column-maps for dofs only at moving mesh interfaces.

Would it be correct to translate this into Tpetra terms as follows? "Let Tpetra's sparse graph and matrices change their local structure, yet not change their communication pattern for sparse matrix-vector multiplies, if changing the communication pattern is unnecessary."

@alanw0
Copy link
Contributor

alanw0 commented Oct 12, 2016

@mhoemmen, I'm not in deep enough yet to be sure if that's a correct description. But if a primary source of change is due to changing ghost entities, then a division between local structure vs boundary/communication patterns may indeed be a good way to describe it.

@spdomin
Copy link
Contributor Author

spdomin commented Feb 23, 2017

Transition to Jira.

@spdomin spdomin closed this as completed Feb 23, 2017
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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants