Re: [deal.II] Standalone Compilation of Examples Fails

On 5/24/24 00:32, Travis Chapman wrote: then the compilation fails during the linking phase. A brief snapshot of the errors is copied below. Please advise, how do I fix this? Travis, I don't know what exactly it is that is going on here. It *looks* like a mismatch in the versions of the Thre

Re: [deal.II] Providing read access to a distributed matrix to more than one thread on the same process

On 5/24/24 19:17, Kyle Schwiebert wrote: ** I do actually have one question here that may be relevant. Whenever I am checking things out in the gdb, it claims I have twice as many threads running as I asked for using MultithreadInfo::set_max_threads(). Is this possibly germane to my issue her

Re: [deal.II] Providing read access to a distributed matrix to more than one thread on the same process

I also am not sure MPI_THREAD_MULTIPLE works anyway. I attempted an alternative approach: Protecting all calls to objects with a shared communicator by a mutex, and I ran into an odd issue: The TrilinosWrappers::MPI::Vector::Vector() constructor seems to be causing segfaults--I do not see ho

Re: [deal.II] Providing read access to a distributed matrix to more than one thread on the same process

I do actually have one question here that may be relevant. Whenever I am checking things out in the gdb, it claims I have twice as many threads running as I asked for using MultithreadInfo::set_max_threads(). Is this possibly germane to my issue here and what is the cause of this? As is common

Re: [deal.II] Providing read access to a distributed matrix to more than one thread on the same process

Dr. Bangerth, Thank you very much for the help. My problem size is not so large as to make copying the matrix impossible, but it is still undesirable and would require a significant rewrite of my codes--and I plan to eventually scale so this is not a long term solution. I also am not sure MPI_

Re: [deal.II] Iterate over active descendants

On 5/24/24 15:24, Felipe Ponce wrote: * * Is there a better alternative to iterate active descendants? Why is /set_to_next_positive/ so slow here?// Is it? I would also expect it to be fast, but have also learned that you can't judge where a code is slow without benchmarking it. So: Have you

[deal.II] Iterate over active descendants

I iterate a collection of cells, and for each one I have to iterate the active descendants. Given a coarse cell, I use a FilteredIterator to iterate active descendants, but the method *set_to_next_positive* significantl

[deal.II] Standalone Compilation of Examples Fails

Hi, I am able to successfully install deal-ii with petsc, p4est and metis, and am able to run the examples that use those libraries after the installation finishes. And yet, when I try to compile those same examples separately, i.e., if I copy them to some other path and do, for example: cd step