On 2010-06-30 15:16, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 2010-06-30 14:59, Vivek Goyal wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 09:44:31AM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: >>> On 2010-06-30 09:34, Jens Axboe wrote: >>>> On 2010-06-30 09:31, Jens Axboe wrote: >>>>> On 2010-06-29 21:32, Vivek Goyal wrote: >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> I was running latest fio and noticed that number of fields in fio >>>>>> --minimal output have gone up from 69 to 77. A increase of 8 >>>>>> fields. Don't see any update in --minimal documentation. Is it >>>>>> regarding total latency thing? >>>>> >>>>> Woops yes, there's a total latency in there as well now. Should >>>>> just be 4 extra fields, though. It gets logged after completion >>>>> latency, but before bandwidth stats. I'll update the >>>>> documentation. >>>>> >>>>> Should we perhaps put a versioning field in there? Now would seem >>>>> to be a good time, since the output has changed anyway. I'm open to >>>>> suggestions from you or other terse output users. >>>> >>>> How about redesigning it a bit to make it more bullet proof... We >>>> could prefix series of fields with the value they are logging. So >>>> for instance, the 4 completion latency fields would include a clat >>>> prefix first: >>>> >>>> clat[%lu;%lu;%f;%f],foo[%lu;%lu],etc >>>> >>>> Would that not be more resilient to future changes? New fields would >>>> not bother you, and reordering should also be fine. >>>> >>>> Any other ideas? >>> >>> With that change, the output would be modified from: >>> >>> file;0;0;131072;356015;377;0;0;0.000000;0.000000;0;0;0.000000;0.000000;0;0;0.000000;0.000000;0;0;0.000000%;0.000000;0.000000;131072;303660;442;0;0;0.000000;0.000000;0;0;0.000000;0.000000;0;0;0.000000;0.000000;0;0;0.000000%;0.000000;0.000000;99.265606%;0.367197%;95;0;343;100.0%;0.0%;0.0%;0.0%;0.0%;0.0%;0.0%;0.00%;0.00%;0.00%;0.00%;0.00%;0.00%;0.00%;0.00%;0.00%;0.00%;0.00%;0.00%;0.00%;0.00%;0.00%;0.00%;0.00%;0.00%;0.00%;0.00%;0.00%;0.00% >>> >>> to >>> >>> id[file;0;0];overview[131072;357913;375];slat[0;0;0.000000;0.000000];clat[0;0;0.000000;0.000000];lat[0;0;0.000000;0.000000];bw[0;0;0.000000%;0.000000;0.000000];overview[131072;304348;441];slat[0;0;0.000000;0.000000];clat[0;0;0.000000;0.000000];lat[0;0;0.000000;0.000000];bw[0;0;0.000000%;0.000000;0.000000];sys[99.754601%;0.000000%;116;0;342];iodepth[100.0%;0.0%;0.0%;0.0%;0.0%;0.0%;0.0%];iolat[0.00%;0.00%;0.00%;0.00%;0.00%;0.00%;0.00%;0.00%;0.00%;0.00%0.00%;0.00%;0.00%;0.00%;0.00%;0.00%;0.00%;0.00%;0.00%;0.00%;0.00%;0.00%]; >>> >>> The upside is that it should be easier to parse, and it's even humanly >>> readable to a much greater extent than the current format. But let me >>> know what you think. >> >> Hi Jens, >> >> I have a very simple awk script which looks for bw and max clat fields. I >> can definitely enhance it to parse this new format. >> >> Above will be broken if you decide the change the name of existing field or >> try to introduce more stats in the existing field. Say some thing additional >> in "overview" field. >> >> Personally I would prefer to version the fio and change the version >> whenever something significant like this happen. Then I can change my >> parsing method based on version. >> >> I think irrespective of the format of the string, versioning fio is >> probably a good idea. >> >> May be we can also provide this new format of output with a new fio >> option say, "fio --terse". > > I don't think adding a new command line parameter for that will make > a lot of sense, only if I revert the offending commit and then add > the parameter when readding it. > > So lets break it and add the version number up front, if that is > what you prefer. If that is easy for you to handle, then I'm guessing > it will be similar for others that use it. > >> At the end of the day, I will just adjust my scripts based on whatever >> format you decide to keep. :-) > > Thanks :-) http://git.kernel.dk/?p=fio.git;a=commit;h=525c2bfabdb7e0093a8775a09ad3e772d962760e It's new prefixed with version 2, and I updated the documentation and man page as well on both the new format and the version field. Oh, and you were right about the 8 extra fields of course, it's 4 added fields but it's per data direction. -- Jens Axboe -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe fio" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
