On 26 July 2016 at 17:53, Saeed <ionictea@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > But what about in the case of a verify job where we want verification done > (do_verify)? Should we exclude the runtime & time_based settings from the > validation/verification job? If I had to guarantee at least one write pass was completed and one verification pass was also completed then yes I'd ensure that runtime and time_based were not set on that write job. runtime/time_based is there so you can guarantee a job will run for given period of time (and not dramatically more or less time). > http://www.coderplay.org/filesysdev/FIO-Data-Integrity-Test.html > > "However, if the job file specifies to run based on time rather than total > number of bytes (setting runtime=int and time_based), then do_verify() is > not performed. " This is correct and matches my previous warning. If you are asking for *both runtime and time_based* and the verification job is a write one then it won't stop writing until runtime is exceeded and at that point there can't be any time left to do the verify. What are you trying to achieve by setting runtime/time_based? -- Sitsofe | http://sucs.org/~sits/ -- 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
