Skip to content

Conversation

@Kh4ster
Copy link
Contributor

@Kh4ster Kh4ster commented Jun 17, 2025

Fixes #103

  • Matrix with an empty problem no longer triggers an assert.
  • If in PDLP mode, a LOG_INFO tells the user he should use DualSimplex instead and returns a NumericalError
  • If in Concurrent mode, PDLP will stop but Dual Simplex will solve the problem

@Kh4ster Kh4ster requested a review from a team as a code owner June 17, 2025 13:52
@Kh4ster Kh4ster requested review from aliceb-nv and rg20 and removed request for aliceb-nv June 17, 2025 13:52
@Kh4ster Kh4ster added bug Something isn't working feature request New feature or request pdlp non-breaking Introduces a non-breaking change and removed feature request New feature or request labels Jun 17, 2025
@rg20
Copy link
Contributor

rg20 commented Jun 17, 2025

/merge

@rapids-bot rapids-bot bot merged commit 159a99f into branch-25.08 Jun 17, 2025
210 of 212 checks passed
@chris-maes
Copy link
Contributor

@Kh4ster This was already merged. But what about instead of just saying we can't handle a problem with no constraints in PDLP, why don't we just add an empty constraint (e.g 0 * x == 0, or -inf <= 0 * x <= inf )

@rgsl888prabhu rgsl888prabhu deleted the pdlp_fix_empty_matrix_problem branch October 29, 2025 16:26
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

bug Something isn't working non-breaking Introduces a non-breaking change pdlp

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[BUG] LP solve crashes on a tiny problem

4 participants