<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Thank you Fedorov. I am still in Intel® oneAPI Math Kernel Library</title>
    <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/Parallel-iterative-solver-CG-or-FGMRES/m-p/944186#M14730</link>
    <description>Thank you Fedorov. I am still wondering the backward and forward substitutions in Pardiso were already parallel. Can we expect the same thing for the triangular solver in the near future?

Thanks,</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 12 Nov 2012 19:16:24 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>bryce155</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2012-11-12T19:16:24Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Parallel iterative solver (CG or FGMRES)</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/Parallel-iterative-solver-CG-or-FGMRES/m-p/944180#M14724</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I have a Incomplete Cholesky preconditioner and run the CG using RCI communication and it behaved very poor. THere is only a very little improvement from sequential and parallel mode. It took 80 secs for parallel and 86 for sequential. I am using intel Xeon X5650 2.67. Is it normal for iterative solver? I used the latest MKL 11. It scaled almost linear with direct solver (Pardiso)&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Thanks,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Bryce&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Nov 2012 02:42:53 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/Parallel-iterative-solver-CG-or-FGMRES/m-p/944180#M14724</guid>
      <dc:creator>bryce155</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2012-11-08T02:42:53Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Hi,</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/Parallel-iterative-solver-CG-or-FGMRES/m-p/944181#M14725</link>
      <description>Hi,
CG is RCI interface that doesn't affect performance of whole algorithm. Does your implementation of multiplication on stiffness matrix and precondition parallel or not?
With best regards,
Alexander Kalinkin</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Nov 2012 02:59:33 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/Parallel-iterative-solver-CG-or-FGMRES/m-p/944181#M14725</guid>
      <dc:creator>Alexander_K_Intel2</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2012-11-08T02:59:33Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Hi Alex,</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/Parallel-iterative-solver-CG-or-FGMRES/m-p/944182#M14726</link>
      <description>Hi Alex,

Thanks for the prompt response.

I used 2 calls of mkl_dcsrtrsv in the preconditioner solve RCI=3 and mkl_dcsrsymv for matrix multiplication. Does it mean that those function dont perform well in parallel?

Best regards,

Bryce</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Nov 2012 03:19:46 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/Parallel-iterative-solver-CG-or-FGMRES/m-p/944182#M14726</guid>
      <dc:creator>bryce155</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2012-11-08T03:19:46Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Bryce, yes, that's may be the</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/Parallel-iterative-solver-CG-or-FGMRES/m-p/944183#M14727</link>
      <description>Bryce, yes, that's may be the problem: level 2 Sparse Triangular solvers (mkl_dcsrtrsv) is not threaded, but computing of m-v product of a sparse symmetrical matrix (mkl_dcsrsymv () ) is threaded. 
--Gennady</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Nov 2012 09:05:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/Parallel-iterative-solver-CG-or-FGMRES/m-p/944183#M14727</guid>
      <dc:creator>Gennady_F_Intel</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2012-11-08T09:05:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Ok. Just one more question.</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/Parallel-iterative-solver-CG-or-FGMRES/m-p/944184#M14728</link>
      <description>Ok. Just one more question. Do you plan to include any parallel preconditioner for the iterative solver such as Block Jacobi (or block incomplete cholesky) or multigrid,etc?</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Nov 2012 15:40:49 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/Parallel-iterative-solver-CG-or-FGMRES/m-p/944184#M14728</guid>
      <dc:creator>bryce155</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2012-11-08T15:40:49Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>the only one thing I can say,</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/Parallel-iterative-solver-CG-or-FGMRES/m-p/944185#M14729</link>
      <description>the only one thing I can say, that there are no such plans in the nearest release of MKL.</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Nov 2012 19:18:26 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/Parallel-iterative-solver-CG-or-FGMRES/m-p/944185#M14729</guid>
      <dc:creator>Gennady_F_Intel</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2012-11-08T19:18:26Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Thank you Fedorov. I am still</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/Parallel-iterative-solver-CG-or-FGMRES/m-p/944186#M14730</link>
      <description>Thank you Fedorov. I am still wondering the backward and forward substitutions in Pardiso were already parallel. Can we expect the same thing for the triangular solver in the near future?

Thanks,</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Nov 2012 19:16:24 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/Parallel-iterative-solver-CG-or-FGMRES/m-p/944186#M14730</guid>
      <dc:creator>bryce155</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2012-11-12T19:16:24Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Hello,</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/Parallel-iterative-solver-CG-or-FGMRES/m-p/944187#M14731</link>
      <description>Hello, 
there are no such plans in the nearest future.
Gennady</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Nov 2012 05:24:09 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/Parallel-iterative-solver-CG-or-FGMRES/m-p/944187#M14731</guid>
      <dc:creator>Gennady_F_Intel</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2012-11-13T05:24:09Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>I also noticed that when</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/Parallel-iterative-solver-CG-or-FGMRES/m-p/944188#M14732</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I&amp;nbsp;also noticed that when linking the parallel MKL libraries, the backward and forward substitutions (Ax=L*U*x=b&amp;lt;==&amp;gt;L*y=b, U*x=y) is almost the same as its sequential versions. Although the CPU usage is close to 100%, the speed for solving the equation A*x=b is not accelerated at all.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I also expect the triangular solver can be parallized in the near future.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Thanks very much!&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Apr 2013 05:37:23 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/Parallel-iterative-solver-CG-or-FGMRES/m-p/944188#M14732</guid>
      <dc:creator>yanpu_z_</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2013-04-19T05:37:23Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

