On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 3:02 PM, Sitsofe Wheeler <sitsofe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, 15 Sep 2018 at 23:14, smitha sunder <sundersmitha@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Hello all, >> >> I have a 30TB drive and I am running into an issue with random writes. >> I went through this thread : >> https://www.spinics.net/lists/fio/msg06294.html that seems to be fixed >> already. > > I think that was something different regarding different blocksizes > per direction. > >> I see the same issue with random reads as well. >> So not sure what is the issue here in my case; any help is greatly appreciated. >> >> >> Read Capacity results: >> Protection: prot_en=1, p_type=1, p_i_exponent=0 [type 2 protection] >> Logical block provisioning: lbpme=1, lbprz=1 >> Last logical block address=58781073407 (0xdaf9fffff), Number of >> logical blocks=58781073408 >> Logical block length=512 bytes >> Logical blocks per physical block exponent=3 [so physical block >> length=4096 bytes] >> Lowest aligned logical block address=0 >> Hence: >> Device size: 30095909584896 bytes, 2.87017e+007 MiB, 30095.9 GB >> >> >> C:\Program Files (x86)\fio>fio --ioengine=windowsaio --group_reporting >> --direct=1 --size=100% --bs=4K --thread --filename=\\.\PhysicalDrive1 >> --name=precond --rw=randwrite --iodepth=1 --numjobs=1 >> --debug=io,random > > <snip> > >> io 3372 fill: io_u 0A458780: >> off=0x144365e7d000,len=0x0,ddir=1,file=\\.\PhysicalDrive1 >> io 3372 get_io_u: zero buflen on 0A458780 >> io 3372 get_io_u failed >> io 3372 drop page cache \\.\PhysicalDrive1 >> random 3372 off rand 17311067694306724737 > > That offset is crazy big - I'm sure it's bigger than a petabyte so my > guess is that something is overflowing. If you use --size=27g does the > job go through? > > [...] > >> I don’t see this issue if I use bs=8K or I use ba=512,8K, etc. > > -- > Sitsofe | http://sucs.org/~sits/ Hi Sitsofe, Thanks for the reply! Yes; If I use --size=27G or if provide the exact size that the OS displays, then the job goes through. Thanks
