I've seen many cases where 250 iterations is not necessarily an indicator of anything being wrong. But, yes, 10K is ridiculous. Why not set the default max to 1000? That's an order of magnitude lower than the current default but is unlikely (I think) to cause people to start seeing puzzling failures in codes that previously worked OK with the current default.
--Richard
On 14 October 2014 06:30, Jed Brown <jed@jedbrown.org> wrote:
> Barry Smith <bsmith@mcs.anl.gov> writes:
>
> Does the marginal value of saving seconds/minutes(?) for a solver to
> reach 10k iterations (when you forgot to enable enough monitoring to
> know what's happening) offset the confusion and alleged misbehavior for
> the people that want to keep iterating?
Following your reasoning, is 10k enough? While 250 is probably too
small, I still think that 10k is too much.
--
Lisandro Dalcin
============
Research Scientist
Computer, Electrical and Mathematical Sciences & Engineering (CEMSE)
Numerical Porous Media Center (NumPor)
King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST)
http://numpor.kaust.edu.sa/
4700 King Abdullah University of Science and Technology
al-Khawarizmi Bldg (Bldg 1), Office # 4332
Thuwal 23955-6900, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
http://www.kaust.edu.sa
Office Phone: +966 12 808-0459