Re: FIO windows

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



One idea is that you are seeing the effect of trying to do I/O to a
file that is not a multiple of the blocksize. In theory if you have
size=1g and you have 9 files then each file ends up being 1024**3/9.0
~ 119304647.1111111 big (see
http://fio.readthedocs.io/en/latest/fio_doc.html#cmdoption-arg-filename
for where this is described). Could it be that Windows goes on to make
a file that is smaller than what we were asking for?

If this theory were right you might see a similar problem if you were
only using 3 files.

On 31 October 2017 at 22:06, David Hare <david.hare@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Yes.. I made a typo when I changed it back, sorry.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sitsofe Wheeler [mailto:sitsofe@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2017 3:05 PM
> To: David Hare <david.hare@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx>; fio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: FIO windows
>
> Yes that's right. Also previously did you mean you had set size=512m even
> though you wrote size=512g ?
>
> On 31 October 2017 at 22:03, David Hare <david.hare@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> I assume you want me to change the size parameter with a 64k blocksize
>> as everything is working with 16k blocksize?
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Sitsofe Wheeler [mailto:sitsofe@xxxxxxxxx]
>> Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2017 2:54 PM
>> To: David Hare <david.hare@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx>; fio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: Re: FIO windows
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Can you add unlink=1 and keep reducing the size parameter (e.g. down
>> to 128m then down to 16m then down to 4m then down to 1m then down to 512k
>> etc)?
>>
>> Can you attach the full output that's produced it fails with this
>> reduced job?
>>
>> IF you are make the problem happen with very little I/O being done
>> (i.e. the job bombs out after doing less than 1MiBytes worth of I/O)
>> you can try adding --debug=all to the job and seeing if that offers
>> any clues as to what the last thing it was doing was?
>>
>> On 31 October 2017 at 21:46, David Hare <david.hare@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>> It was ok with or without the colon, the size didn’t seem to make a
>>> difference, but blocksize did.. see the commented block sizes below.
>>>
>>> fio2.fio
>>> [global]
>>>
>>> ioengine=windowsaio
>>>
>>> ;blocksize=64k - error
>>> ;blocksize=32k - error
>>> ;blocksize=16k - no error
>>>
>>> blocksize=16k
>>>
>>> direct=1
>>>
>>> thread
>>>
>>> size=512g
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> time_based
>>> runtime=10
>>>
>>> [asdf]
>>> filename=F\:\\testfile:G\:\\testfile:H\:\\testfile:I\:\\testfile:J\:\
>>> \ testfile:K\:\\testfile:L\:\\testfile:M\:\\testfile:P\:\\testfile
>>>
>>> Results:
>>> Run status group 0 (all jobs):
>>> READ: bw=141MiB/s (148MB/s), 141MiB/s-141MiB/s (148MB/s-148MB/s),
>>> io=1413MiB (1481MB), run=10001-10001msec
>>>
>>>
>>> -Dave
>
> --
> Sitsofe | http://sucs.org/~sits/
>
>
> Disclaimer
>
> The information contained in this communication from the sender is
> confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others
> authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby
> notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in
> relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may
> be unlawful.



-- 
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




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux IDE]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux