clarify the usage of rw_sequencer

clarify the usage of rw_sequencer

[Ankit Kumar]

Update man page clarifying the usage of rw_sequencer=sequential
Fixes: https://github.com/axboe/fio/issues/1223

Ankit Kumar (1):
  doc: clarify the usage of rw_sequencer

 HOWTO.rst | 10 +++++-----
 fio.1     | 12 ++++++------
 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

-- 
2.17.1

[PATCH 1/1] doc: clarify the usage of rw_sequencer

[Ankit Kumar]

Update man page clarifying the usage of rw_sequencer=sequential

Fixes: https://github.com/axboe/fio/issues/1223

Signed-off-by: Ankit Kumar <ankit.kumar@samsung.com>
---
 HOWTO.rst | 10 +++++-----
 fio.1     | 12 ++++++------
 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/HOWTO.rst b/HOWTO.rst
index 0a48a453..806c1053 100644
--- a/HOWTO.rst
+++ b/HOWTO.rst
@@ -1176,11 +1176,11 @@ I/O type
 			Generate the same offset.
 
 	``sequential`` is only useful for random I/O, where fio would normally
-	generate a new random offset for every I/O. If you append e.g. 8 to randread,
-	you would get a new random offset for every 8 I/Os. The result would be a
-	seek for only every 8 I/Os, instead of for every I/O. Use ``rw=randread:8``
-	to specify that. As sequential I/O is already sequential, setting
-	``sequential`` for that would not result in any differences.  ``identical``
+	generate a new random offset for every I/O. If you append e.g. 8 to
+	randread, i.e. ``rw=randread:8`` you would get a new random offset for
+	every 8 I/Os. The result would be one single random offset and 7
+	sequential offset. As sequential I/O is already sequential, setting
+	``sequential`` for that would not result in any difference.  ``identical``
 	behaves in a similar fashion, except it sends the same offset 8 number of
 	times before generating a new offset.
 
diff --git a/fio.1 b/fio.1
index eb87533f..c5ba0436 100644
--- a/fio.1
+++ b/fio.1
@@ -952,12 +952,12 @@ Generate the same offset.
 .P
 \fBsequential\fR is only useful for random I/O, where fio would normally
 generate a new random offset for every I/O. If you append e.g. 8 to randread,
-you would get a new random offset for every 8 I/Os. The result would be a
-seek for only every 8 I/Os, instead of for every I/O. Use `rw=randread:8'
-to specify that. As sequential I/O is already sequential, setting
-\fBsequential\fR for that would not result in any differences. \fBidentical\fR
-behaves in a similar fashion, except it sends the same offset 8 number of
-times before generating a new offset.
+i.e. `rw=randread:8' you would get a new random offset for every 8 I/Os. The
+result would be one single random offset and 7 sequential offset. As
+sequential I/O is already sequential, setting \fBsequential\fR for that would
+not result in any difference. \fBidentical\fR behaves in a similar fashion,
+except it sends the same offset 8 number of times before generating a new
+offset.
 .RE
 .TP
 .BI unified_rw_reporting \fR=\fPstr
-- 
2.17.1

Re: [PATCH 1/1] doc: clarify the usage of rw_sequencer

[Vincent Fu]

On 1/10/23 01:42, Ankit Kumar wrote:
> Update man page clarifying the usage of rw_sequencer=sequential
> 
> Fixes: https://github.com/axboe/fio/issues/1223
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ankit Kumar <ankit.kumar@samsung.com>
> ---
>   HOWTO.rst | 10 +++++-----
>   fio.1     | 12 ++++++------
>   2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/HOWTO.rst b/HOWTO.rst
> index 0a48a453..806c1053 100644
> --- a/HOWTO.rst
> +++ b/HOWTO.rst
> @@ -1176,11 +1176,11 @@ I/O type
>   			Generate the same offset.
>   
>   	``sequential`` is only useful for random I/O, where fio would normally
> -	generate a new random offset for every I/O. If you append e.g. 8 to randread,
> -	you would get a new random offset for every 8 I/Os. The result would be a
> -	seek for only every 8 I/Os, instead of for every I/O. Use ``rw=randread:8``
> -	to specify that. As sequential I/O is already sequential, setting
> -	``sequential`` for that would not result in any differences.  ``identical``
> +	generate a new random offset for every I/O. If you append e.g. 8 to
> +	randread, i.e. ``rw=randread:8`` you would get a new random offset for
> +	every 8 I/Os. The result would be one single random offset and 7
> +	sequential offset. As sequential I/O is already sequential, setting
> +	``sequential`` for that would not result in any difference.  ``identical``
>   	behaves in a similar fashion, except it sends the same offset 8 number of
>   	times before generating a new offset.
>   
> diff --git a/fio.1 b/fio.1
> index eb87533f..c5ba0436 100644
> --- a/fio.1
> +++ b/fio.1
> @@ -952,12 +952,12 @@ Generate the same offset.
>   .P
>   \fBsequential\fR is only useful for random I/O, where fio would normally
>   generate a new random offset for every I/O. If you append e.g. 8 to randread,
> -you would get a new random offset for every 8 I/Os. The result would be a
> -seek for only every 8 I/Os, instead of for every I/O. Use `rw=randread:8'
> -to specify that. As sequential I/O is already sequential, setting
> -\fBsequential\fR for that would not result in any differences. \fBidentical\fR
> -behaves in a similar fashion, except it sends the same offset 8 number of
> -times before generating a new offset.
> +i.e. `rw=randread:8' you would get a new random offset for every 8 I/Os. The
> +result would be one single random offset and 7 sequential offset. As
> +sequential I/O is already sequential, setting \fBsequential\fR for that would
> +not result in any difference. \fBidentical\fR behaves in a similar fashion,
> +except it sends the same offset 8 number of times before generating a new
> +offset.
>   .RE
>   .TP
>   .BI unified_rw_reporting \fR=\fPstr

Ankit, how about:

"The result would be a sequence of 8 sequential offsets with a random 
starting point."

Vincent