On 2012-09-29 04:11, Akash Verma wrote: > Let's say I use FIO with the following job file: > > > [group_1] > rw=randwrite > size=1024k > ioengine=libaio > time_based=1 > runtime=10 > direct=1 > do_verify=0 > numjobs=2 > group_reporting=1 > > [group_2] > rw=randread > size=1024k > ioengine=libaio > time_based=1 > runtime=10 > direct=1 > numjobs=2 > group_reporting=1 > > > I get a single report, named after group_1 but actually including > results for group_2 as well. Since I'm using group_reporting with > numjobs, shouldn't I be getting two reports, one for group_1 and one > for group_2? > > I am able to get the desired functionality using: > new_group=1 > under group_2, causing FIO to specifically treat that group as > separate for reporting purposes. However the current behavior still > doesn't conform with the description given for both group_reporting > and new_group. Hmm, I think it's perfectly aligned with what is described. The documentation states that jobs are part of the same group, except if: - They are separated by a stone wall, which implies starting a new group. - or the new_group primitive is used explicitly. -- 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
