dolfin team mailing list archive

[Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx>]

Both.

But I wouldn't call DOLFINs current system naive. It actually does
pretty much the same thing as the form compiler, except for generating
the code. It builds a similar data structure as FFC (but FFC does a
better job) and precomputes the reference tensor.

/Anders

On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 01:28:28PM -0500, Robert C.Kirby wrote:

> This is why we need profiling information.  Was the computation 
> dominated by assembly because of intepretive overhead (ie the naive 
> interpreter bogged down in a deeper tree than for poisson) or because 
> of increased floating-point demands?
> 
> Rob
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Oct 26, 2004, at 12:08 PM, Ridgway Scott wrote:
> 
> >>One example is the module elasticity-updated in DOLFIN for which
> >>assembly time dominates solution time (using the old form evaluation
> >>system in DOLFIN). This would be a typical example of a system which
> >>is more complicated than Poisson and where assembly time may be
> >>significant.
> >
> >This is a good point. There are these complex-model linear problems
> >where you just form the matrix and solve. Is that what you were
> >thinking? Since you can vary the elasticity tensor these days with
> >special materials, one could even imagine optimizing over varying
> >elasticity tensors, in an extreme case.
> >
> >                                Ridg
> >
> 
>