Re: iterative vs. direct methods for linear systems
- From: Evgenii Rudnyi <usenet@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 11:35:46 -0700 (PDT)
On Apr 1, 9:00 pm, s...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Victor Eijkhout) wrote:
Evgenii Rudnyi <use...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
But believe me, if you try modern direct solvers, you
will be surprised.
Can they improve on the N^{5/3} space bound for 3D problems?
Unfortunately I do not not know a theoretical bound for multifrontal
solvers. Sorry for that.
Han uses a crude band solver, so he indeed attains this bound. If other
direct solvers only improve this by a factor, I wouldn't consider it
worth his while to rewrite his code.
In my knowledge finite elements codes now use multifrontal solvers.
For example in ANSYS there is a frontal solver but it is much slower
as compared with multifrontal. Nowadays no one uses the frontal solver
in ANSYS anymore.
Also I am not quite sure if I understand why it is necesssery to
rewrite a solver. It would be much simpler just to call some already
developed solver. I can recommend MUMPS.
Evgenii http://MatrixProgramming.com
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: iterative vs. direct methods for linear systems
- From: Bruce Scott TOK
- Re: iterative vs. direct methods for linear systems
- From: Han de Bruijn
- Re: iterative vs. direct methods for linear systems
- From: Victor Eijkhout
- Re: iterative vs. direct methods for linear systems
- References:
- Re: iterative vs. direct methods for linear systems
- From: Victor Eijkhout
- Re: iterative vs. direct methods for linear systems
- Prev by Date: Re: integration + Levenberg-Marquardt (Numerical Recipes)
- Next by Date: Re: iterative vs. direct methods for linear systems
- Previous by thread: Re: iterative vs. direct methods for linear systems
- Next by thread: Re: iterative vs. direct methods for linear systems
- Index(es):