FIO not generating multiple jobs for directories

FIO not generating multiple jobs for directories

[Srinivasa Chamarthy]

I have 6 mounted LVM volumes on a RAID0. I was generating files using
FIO to fill up the volumes simultaneously. I see that FIO is using
only one thread even though i have specified numjobs=6 in the jobfile.
Its generating io with one thread sequentially from directory to
directory. Numjobs seems to be working ok when i run directly on block
devices using filename.

# fio -v
fio-2.2.6-25-g87f5

JobFile:

# cat fileio.fio
[fileio]
ioengine=libaio
rw=write
directory=/mnt/lv0:/mnt/lv1:/mnt/lv2:/mnt/lv3:/mnt/lv4:/mnt/lv5
filesize=1m-40m
nrfiles=1024
file_service_type=random:64
random_generator=tausworthe
rate=,400m
bs=8k
numjobs=6
iodepth=32
scramble_buffers=1
blocksize_unaligned
blocksize_range=8k-124k
loops=1
percentage_random=100
random_distribution=random
norandommap
overwrite=1
iodepth_low=8
iodepth_batch=16
fill_device=1
refill_buffers=1
fsync=1024
prio=0

# fio --output=fio_test.out_15 fileio.fio

Process tree:
root      1308  0.0  0.2  43256 23508 ?        Ss   Apr03   1:50 SCREEN -Aa
root      1309  0.0  0.0  14556  2632 pts/1    Ss+  Apr03   0:00  \_ bash
root      2860  0.0  0.0  29032   748 pts/1    T    Apr03   0:00  |
\_ vim fio_dedup.out_3
root      1517  0.0  0.0  14548  2964 pts/2    Ss   Apr03   0:00  \_ bash
root     24413 12.0  2.1 296064 178336 pts/2   Dl+  00:07   0:01  |
\_ fio --output=fio_test.out_15 fileio.fio
root      2768  0.0  0.0  14540  2208 pts/3    Ss   Apr03   0:00  \_ bash
root     24250  0.0  0.0   4512   868 pts/3    S+   Apr08   0:00  |
\_ iostat -dxm /dev/sdb /dev/sdc /dev/sdd /dev/sde /dev/sdf /dev/sdg
/dev/sdh /dev/sdi 1
root     25483  0.0  0.0  14700  2948 pts/4    Ss   Apr06   0:00  \_ bash
root     24427  0.0  0.0  25560  1508 pts/4    R+   00:08   0:00  |   \_ ps auxf

After filling each device, one thread ends and the other starts
sequentially. There might be something wrong with tracking pid too.

# fio --output=fio_test.out_15 fileio.fio
fio: pid=0, err=28/file:filesetup.c:79, func=open, error=No space left on device
fio: pid=0, err=28/file:filesetup.c:79, func=open, error=No space left on device
fio: pid=0, err=28/file:filesetup.c:79, func=open, error=No space left on device
fio: pid=0, err=28/file:filesetup.c:79, func=open, error=No space left on device

Is there anything wrong with the parameters?

-- 
Srinivasa R Chamarthy

Re: FIO not generating multiple jobs for directories

[Sitsofe Wheeler]

Hi,

On 9 April 2015 at 05:18, Srinivasa Chamarthy <chamarthy.raju@gmail.com> wrote:
> # cat fileio.fio
<snip>
>
> Is there anything wrong with the parameters?

Any chance you can minimize the jobfile such that it contains the
minimum number of parameters that still show the problem?

-- 
Sitsofe | http://sucs.org/~sits/

Re: FIO not generating multiple jobs for directories

[Srinivasa Chamarthy]

Hi, Thanks for the reply. I did some investigation by removing each
parameter and the problem seems to be with parameter overwrite when
its set to true.

if i remove the parameter from the job file and run, i get the
expected number of threads as specified.

# cat fio_testjob.fio
[fileio]
ioengine=libaio
rw=write
directory=/mnt/sdb:/mnt/sdc:/mnt/sdd:/mnt/sde
filesize=1m-40m
nrfiles=1024
file_service_type=random:64
random_generator=tausworthe
rate=,400m
bs=8k
numjobs=6
iodepth=32
scramble_buffers=1
blocksize_unaligned
blocksize_range=8k-124k
loops=1
percentage_random=100
random_distribution=random
norandommap
overwrite=1    <<<<<< Problem with this parameter If i remove, it just works.
fill_device=1
fsync=1024
prio=0

From the man page i do not see any relevance to the threads for the
param "overwrite"

       overwrite=bool
              If writing, setup the file first and do overwrites.
Default: false.

May be some issue here or my understanding is wrong.

On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 2:27 AM, Sitsofe Wheeler <sitsofe@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 9 April 2015 at 05:18, Srinivasa Chamarthy <chamarthy.raju@gmail.com> wrote:
>> # cat fileio.fio
> <snip>
>>
>> Is there anything wrong with the parameters?
>
> Any chance you can minimize the jobfile such that it contains the
> minimum number of parameters that still show the problem?
>
> --
> Sitsofe | http://sucs.org/~sits/



-- 
Srinivasa R Chamarthy