[SCIP] My pricer is not being called :-(

[Gerald Gamrath]

Dear Diego,

I fear we can only help you understand why your event handler is called 
before pricing if you provide some more information. There are many 
different types of events in SCIP and some of them could be called 
before pricing is called. A wild guess: did you implement both the 
redcost and the farkas pricing? In case of an infeasible LP, only the 
latter would be called.

Best,
Gerald

Am 07.04.19 um 17:07 schrieb Diego Delle Donne:
> Sorry! My bad!
>
> I got a stupid bug in my BranchingEventHandler code which was bounding 
> to 0 some of the variables (thus making some nodes infeasible). Now 
> it's working as it should.
>
> Anyway, I don't understand why SCIP was calling my 
> BranchingEventHandler::scip_exec method before calling my pricing 
> procedure. Can this happen? I'd think that the pricing step should 
> finish before scip make some branching step... am I wrong on this?
>
> Sorry for the troubles!
> Diego
>
>
> El dom., 7 abr. 2019 a las 16:43, Diego Delle Donne 
> (<diegodd at gmail.com <mailto:diegodd at gmail.com>>) escribió:
>
>     Dear SCIP community,
>
>     I'm coding a Branch & Price. As a first approach, I was starting
>     with just one dummy binary variable representing a feasible
>     solution (with a very bad obj function cost) and everything worked
>     fine. SCIP starts with this variable as a feasible solution
>     (primal bound), then call my pricing and at some point (when my
>     pricing says so), it closes the LP relaxation and starts branching
>     (if necessary).
>
>     Now, I want to start with a set of binary variables (obtained by
>     an initial heuristic approach) representing a better initial
>     solution than this dummy variable. So, I added these variables
>     instead of the dummy variable. The nice thing is that SCIP is able
>     to get the initial feasible solution / primal bound (by putting
>     all these variables in 1). The bad thing is that it is immediately
>     closing the root node without calling my pricer (somehow it uses
>     this solution as the dual bound, which is not right). It ends up
>     saying that the problem is solved to optimality with my initial
>     heuristic solution (and I know for sure that this solution is not
>     optimal in my examples).
>
>     Any ideas on what am I doing wrong? :-(
>
>     Thanks in advance!
>     Diego
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Scip mailing list
> Scip at zib.de
> https://listserv.zib.de/mailman/listinfo/scip

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.zib.de/pipermail/scip/attachments/20190409/9b7072f0/attachment.html>