Re: A fio job that just waits?

[Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>]

On 2022/01/27 8:08, Nick Neumann wrote:
> Is there a clean way to create a fio job that just waits for a fixed
> time period? I'm fairly new to fio, and want a delay between two
> consecutive jobs. I use "wait_for" to serialize as needed, and
> expected "startdelay" to allow me to put the desired delay between the
> two. But it looks like the startdelay for a job begins when fio starts
> and not when the job referenced in a "wait_for" finishes.

The job that needs to be started after a delay should have both wait_for and
startdelay options. That should work.

> 
> I can play games with a job with a very low bandwidth limit (e.g.
> 1B/s) and "runtime" and "time_based", but it feels hacky.
> 
> Am I thinking about how to get a delay between two jobs wrong? Is
> there a better way? I realize I could just run fio multiple times with
> command line delays between the runs, but I'd like the results of the
> runs to share the same time basis and output/log files.
> 
> Thanks,
> Nick


-- 
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research