Flexible I/O Tester development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jens Axboe <jaxboe@fusionio.com>
To: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>
Cc: Steven Pratt <slpratt@austin.ibm.com>,
	"fio@vger.kernel.org" <fio@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: test definition help needed
Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2011 15:45:19 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D50057F.6010105@fusionio.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <x49oc6n9ak6.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com>

On 2011-02-07 15:35, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> Jens Axboe <jaxboe@fusionio.com> writes:
> 
>> On 2011-02-04 20:21, Steven Pratt wrote:
>>> I am trying to create a job file that randomly select a file form an imported list and reads the entire file sequentially. Them moves to the next file. I also want multiple jobs(processe) running the same workload. I have this:
>>>
>>> [global]
>>> bs=4k
>>> time_based=1
>>> runtime=15m
>>> iodepth=4
>>> rw=read
>>> ioengine=libaio
>>> time_based=1
>>> ramp_time=600s
>>> norandommap
>>>
>>> [job1]
>>> opendir=/${FIO_MOUNT}/session1/small_file1
>>> file_service_type=sequential
>>> numjobs=8
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I used file_service_type=sequential because tought without it it would
>>> only do a single read (block) from the file before switching to a
>>> different file, which is not what I want. The issue with this test as
>>> written is it seems like all the fio processes choose files in the
>>> same order so I get way more cache hits than I want. I want this to be
>>> more of a random file selection, but with reading whole file.  Any
>>> advice?
>>
>> file_service_type=random:<largenum>
>>
>> should do what you need, I think. If you ensure that <largenum> is
>> sufficiently large that the file will always be finished before you run
>> out, then that should work.
> 
> Also note that with ioengine=libaio, you'll also want to specify direct
> io (otherwise io_submit will block until the I/O is complete).  If you
> really want buffered, then you need to choose a different io engine.

Good point. I used to have a warning for that, but dropped it since it
got annoying when I was testing the buffered aio patches. Perhaps I
should reinstate it.

In any case, if the result is inspected, it'll be apparent that the
queue depth was 1 throughout the run.

-- 
Jens Axboe


  reply	other threads:[~2011-02-07 14:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-02-04 19:21 test definition help needed Steven Pratt
2011-02-06 21:00 ` Jens Axboe
2011-02-07 14:35   ` Jeff Moyer
2011-02-07 14:45     ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2011-02-07 14:56       ` Jeff Moyer
2011-02-07 20:51   ` Steven Pratt
2011-02-07 21:08     ` Jens Axboe

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4D50057F.6010105@fusionio.com \
    --to=jaxboe@fusionio.com \
    --cc=fio@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=jmoyer@redhat.com \
    --cc=slpratt@austin.ibm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox