-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 288
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
Allow creating matrices based on hash tables #3983
base: devel
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Those look like real failures - somehow in a bunch of use cases we're now trying to zero a matrix before it's initialized? |
Yea, I'll get back to this particular PR soon |
17dc9e1
to
3b318be
Compare
This reverts commit 510cbbb.
3b318be
to
d7b4e6e
Compare
Job Coverage, step Generate coverage on f102d7c wanted to post the following: Coverage
Warnings
This comment will be updated on new commits. |
this is ready for review |
src/systems/system.C
Outdated
pr.second->use_hash_table(use_hash); | ||
if (!use_hash) | ||
this->_require_sparsity_pattern = true; | ||
} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It looks like we definitely need some test coverage of a system with a mix of hash and non-hash matrices. Even if it's not hit in CI until we upgrade PETSc there, we'll at least get some early warning on our own machines.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We already have a PETSc sufficient for testing in apptainer. I will look into making something
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I still need to add some testing for this
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
k done
I take it there's no way via PETSc to get around the need for Other than that this is looking good now. |
The thing is that there is no "hash table" matrix in PETSc. There is just a "hash table until you call |
As the new example test is currently written, we will need https://gitlab.com/petsc/petsc/-/merge_requests/8063 to fix the failure. I'll probably just skip resetting the preallocation for the "non-hash-table" matrix in the mean time |
This is only supported by the PETSc backend