From a559d16ba3585ae8fb9457c67cf66851a5d463c8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: raphael couturier Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2014 11:41:38 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 1/1] new --- paper.tex | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/paper.tex b/paper.tex index 7e4945e..c8e503d 100644 --- a/paper.tex +++ b/paper.tex @@ -1138,12 +1138,12 @@ Concerning the experiments some other remarks are interesting. examples, we also obtained similar gain between GMRES and TSIRM but those examples are not scalable with many cores. In general, we had some problems with more than $4,096$ cores. -\item We have tested many iterative solvers available in PETSc. In fast, it is +\item We have tested many iterative solvers available in PETSc. In fact, it is possible to use most of them with TSIRM. From our point of view, the condition to use a solver inside TSIRM is that the solver must have a restart - feature. More precisely, the solver must support to be stoped and restarted + feature. More precisely, the solver must support to be stopped and restarted without decrease its converge. That is why with GMRES we stop it when it is - naturraly restarted (i.e. with $m$ the restart parameter). The Conjugate + naturally restarted (i.e. with $m$ the restart parameter). The Conjugate Gradient (CG) and all its variants do not have ``restarted'' version in PETSc, so they are not efficient. They will converge with TSIRM but not quickly because if we compare a normal CG with a CG for which we stop it each 16 -- 2.39.5