1887

Abstract

Summary

Incomplete factorization methods are an important part of the linear solver strategy in reservoir simulation. It has been shown earlier that the inherited pressure-decoupling effect of (block)-ILU(0) plays an important role for the convergence of efficient linear solvers like System-AMG or CPR. From Black-Oil to coupled geomechanics.

With these specific linear systems, this decoupling is a by-product of the row-wise ILU-elimination. However, this also makes ILU sequential in nature, which is a problem on parallel compute hardware.

The parallelization of ILU methods has been a field of active research – and it still is. Various approaches are reported in the literature. All exploit inherited parallelism in the sparse systems to solve. Either by reordering the system accordingly or by setting synchronization points induced by the underlying structure (so-called wavefronts). All of these approaches have certain disadvantages and advantages regarding parallel efficiency and numerical robustness. It depends on the application which approach is best-suited.

Re-ordering approaches affect the elimination order. Hence, they can have significant robustness impacts for AMG in reservoir simulation.

Wavefront parallelizations guarantee equivalence to the sequential method. However, they either require the parallelization structure to be induced by the geometry. This may be challenging in unstructured cases and voids a main advantage of AMG. Or they perform a row-wise data-dependency scan, with a resulting amount of blocking communication.

In this paper, we are going to present a wavefront parallelization for (block-) ILU(0) that does not perform its dependency scan by considering groups of rows. The resulting wavefront setup works analogously to aggregative AMG setups, just with additional constraints. The outcome is a data-dependency graph where one can control the compromise between the frequency of data-exchange and wait-time. The equivalence to the sequential ILU(0) algorithm is still guaranteed.

While this approach can’t compete with the parallelizability of methods like Jacobi-relaxations, it can exploit inherited parallelism with ILU(0) for both OpenMP and MPI. It maintains the numerical properties of the original algorithm. We will demonstrate both with test problems as well as with ones from industrial reservoir simulations.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202035046
2020-09-14
2024-04-19
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aziz, K., & Settari, A.
    (1979). Petroleum Reservoir Simulation. Applied Science Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Chow, E., & Patel, A.
    (2015). Fine-Grained Parallel Incomplete LU Factorizations. SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing37 (2), 169–193.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Dong, X., & Cooperman, G.
    (2011). A Bit-Compatible Parallelization for ILU(k) Preconditioning. Proceedings of the 17th EuroPar, 66–77.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Ehrmann, S., Gries, S., & Schweitzer, M.
    (2019). Generalization of algebraic multiscale to algebraic multigrid. Computational Geosciences.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Gries, S.
    (2015). System-AMG Approaches for Industrial Fully and Adaptive Implicit Oil Reservoir Simulations. Cologne: PhD thesis at the University of Cologne.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. (2018). On the Convergence of System-AMG in Reservoir Simulation. SPE Journal.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Gries, S., Metsch, B., Terekhov, K. M., & Tomin, P.
    (2019). System-AMG for Fully Coupled Reservoir Simulation with Geomechanics. SPE Reservoir Simulation Conference.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Gries, S., Stüben, K., Brown, G., Chen, D., & Collins, D.
    (2014). Preconditioning for Efficiently Applying Algebraic Multigrid in Fully Implicit Reservoir Simulations. SPE Journal.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Helal, A. E., Aji, A. M., Chu, M. L., Beckmann, B. M., & Feng, W.-c.
    (2019). Adaptive Task Aggregation for High-Performance Sparse Solvers on GPUs. 28th Internation Conference on Parallel Architectures and Compilatuin Techniques.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Heuveline, V., Lukarski, D., & Weiss, J.-P.
    (2011). Ehanced Parallel ILU(p)-based Preconditioners for Multi-Core CPUs and GPUs - The Power(q)-Pattern Method. Preprint Series of the Engineering Mathematics and Computation Lab 8.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Hysom, D., & Pothen, A.
    (2001). A Scalable Parallel Algorithm for Incomplete Factor Preconditioning. SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing, 2194–2215.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Janna, C., Ferronato, M., & Gambolati, G.
    (2012). Parallel Inexact Construit Preconditioning for Ill-Conditioned Consolidation Problems. Computational Geosciences16 (3), 661–675.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Joubert, W., Oppe, T., Janardhan, R., & Dearholt, W.
    (n.d.). Fully Parallel Global M/ILU Preconditioning for 3 - D Structured Problems. The Pennsylvania State University CiterSeerX Archives.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Karypis, G., & Kumar, V.
    (1999). Multilevel k-way partitioning scheme for irregular graphs. Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing, 48(1), 96–129.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Krechel, A., & Stüben, K.
    (2001). Parallel algebraic multigrid based on subdomain blocking. Report on a parallel AMG approach. Parallel Computing27, 1009–1031.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Ma, S., & Saad, Y.
    (1998). Distributed ILU(0) and SOR Preconditioners for Unstructured Linear Systems. SIAM Journal on Computing.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Meier Yang, U.
    (2006). Parallel Algebraic Multigrid Methods — High Performance Preconditioners. Lecture Notes in Computational Science and Egineering51, 209–236.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Meijerink, J., & van der Vorst, H.
    (1977). An Iterative Solution Method for Linear Systems of which the Coefficient Matrix is a Symmetric M-Matrix. Mathematics of Computation31 (137), 14–162.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Naumov, M.
    (2012). Parallel Incomplete-LU and Cholesky Factorization in the Preconditioned Iterative Methods on the GPU. Nvidia Technical Report NVR-2012-003.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Plum, H.-J., Krechel, A., Gries, S., Metsch, B., Nick, F., Schweitzer, M., & Stüben, K.
    (2017). Parallel algebraic multigrid. In M.Griebel, A.Schüller, & M.Schweitzer, Scientific Computing and Algorithms in Industrial Simulations (pp. 121–134). Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Saad, Y.
    (1996). Iterative Methods for Sparse Linear Systems. Boston: PWS Publishin Company.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Stüben, K.
    (2001). A Review of Algebraic Multigrid. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. van der Vorst, H.
    (1989). High Performance Parallel Preconditioning. SIAM Journal on Scientific and Statistical Computing10, 1174–1185.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Vanek, p., Mandel, J., & Brezina, M.
    (1996). Algebraic Multigrid by Smoother Aggregation for Second and Fourth Order Elliptic Problems. Computing56, 179–196.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Venkat, A., Mohammadi, M. S., Park, J., Rong, H., Braik, R., Strout, M. M., & Mary, H.
    (2016). Automating Wavefront Parallelization for Sparse Matrix Computations. Super Computing.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Wallis, J. R.
    (1983). Incomplete Gaussian Elimination as a Preconditioner for Generalized Conjugate Gradient Acceleration. SPE Reservoir Simulation Symposium.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Wallis, J. R., Kendall, R., Little, T., & Nolen, J.
    (1985). Constrained Residual Acceleration of Conjugate Gradient Acceleration. SPE Reservoir Simulation Symposium.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Wittum, G.
    (1989). On the Robustness of ILU Smoothing. SIAM Journal on Scientific Statistical Computing10 (4), 699–717.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202035046
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202035046
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error