On 11/21/22 05:36, Friendy.Su@xxxxxxxx wrote:
I think having this option will be confusing and lead to users trying to
run a job with --ioengine=psync --rw=filecreate.
However, I understand the confusion that arises when the file operation
ioengines are used. Might there be some other way to help? Perhaps the
ioengine could emit some sort of message? Or the documentation for the
file operation ioengines could be enhanced?
I created this patch because somebody sent me email to ask why rw string shows 'read' when he measured by filecreate engine. And more, users felt strange what does IOPS/BW for file operation mean?
I think we can do option check at beginning. '--ioengine=filecreate' and '--rw=filecreate' must be paired. If not paired, emit error message and exit. How do you think?
Though FIO is designed for IO measurement originally, file operation performance is also regularly evaluated for file system. It is helpful if expand FIO to adapt to file operation benchmark.
Friendy
I think the better solution is to augment the documentation with a
detailed discussion of the file operation ioengines because they work so
differently from other fio ioengines.
Because of how unusual these ioengines are, there are many ways the
ioengines can be misused and their results misinterpreted. Making a
change like this reduces the possible confusion by only a small amount.
Having a detailed guide to these ioengines in the documentation will
more comprehensively reduce confusion and misuse of these ioengines.
Vincent
