From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from merlin.infradead.org ([205.233.59.134]:58371 "EHLO merlin.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752264Ab3F0OQu (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Jun 2013 10:16:50 -0400 Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 16:16:48 +0200 From: Jens Axboe Subject: Re: Simulating bursts at different rates at irregular intervals? Message-ID: <20130627141648.GY25599@kernel.dk> References: <255129448.30162533.1372322165642.JavaMail.root@framestore.com> <803980722.30163228.1372322272381.JavaMail.root@framestore.com> <20130627090227.GL25599@kernel.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: fio-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: fio@vger.kernel.org To: Roger Sibert Cc: FIO On Thu, Jun 27 2013, Roger Sibert wrote: > Just a thought that came to mind. > > To work around the problem would the following work? > Run fio to get you max MB/s > Write a script to generate you work/jobs file that has randomizes > length of time for the job to run and % of max for it to run at. That's a bit of a bother, though, since you have to collect data and output from each individual run. And not only that, shutdown/startup will make things less than smooth. It could potentially dirty your results. We could have something ala: rate_sequence={10s:20M},{20s:5M} or whatever, which runs 10s at 20M/sec, then 20s at 5M/sec. Repeat. Would be fairly easy to do. -- Jens Axboe