dolfin team mailing list archive

["Marie E. Rognes" <meg@xxxxxxxxx>]

The current solve function seems rather verbose: the output from the 
Poisson demo (with PETSc 3.2) is the below. Where does this output come 
from and is it intentional?

--

Solving linear variational problem.
KSP Object: 1 MPI processes
  type: preonly
  maximum iterations=10000, initial guess is zero
  tolerances:  relative=1e-05, absolute=1e-50, divergence=10000
  left preconditioning
  using NONE norm type for convergence test
PC Object: 1 MPI processes
  type: lu
    LU: out-of-place factorization
    tolerance for zero pivot 1e-12
    using diagonal shift to prevent zero pivot
    matrix ordering: nd
    factor fill ratio given 0, needed 0
      Factored matrix follows:
        Matrix Object:         1 MPI processes
          type: seqaij
          rows=1089, cols=1089
          package used to perform factorization: umfpack
          total: nonzeros=0, allocated nonzeros=0
          total number of mallocs used during MatSetValues calls =0
            not using I-node routines
            UMFPACK run parameters:
              Control[UMFPACK_PRL]: 1
              Control[UMFPACK_STRATEGY]: 0
              Control[UMFPACK_DENSE_COL]: 0.2
              Control[UMFPACK_DENSE_ROW]: 0.2
              Control[UMFPACK_AMD_DENSE]: 10
              Control[UMFPACK_BLOCK_SIZE]: 32
              Control[UMFPACK_FIXQ]: 0
              Control[UMFPACK_AGGRESSIVE]: 1
              Control[UMFPACK_PIVOT_TOLERANCE]: 0.1
              Control[UMFPACK_SYM_PIVOT_TOLERANCE]: 0.001
              Control[UMFPACK_SCALE]: 1
              Control[UMFPACK_ALLOC_INIT]: 0.7
              Control[UMFPACK_DROPTOL]: 0
              Control[UMFPACK_IRSTEP]: 0
              Control[UMFPACK_ORDERING]: AMD (not using the PETSc ordering)
  linear system matrix = precond matrix:
  Matrix Object:   1 MPI processes
    type: seqaij
    rows=1089, cols=1089
    total: nonzeros=7361, allocated nonzeros=7361
    total number of mallocs used during MatSetValues calls =0
      not using I-node routines

--
Marie