Am Dienstag, 2. August 2011 schrieben Sie:
> That's a long email! The stonewall should be put in the job section
> that has to wait for previous jobs. So, ala:
>
> [job1]
> something
>
> [job2]
> stonewall # will wait for job1 to finish
> something
>
> [job3]
> something # will run in parallel with job2
>
> [job4]
> stonewall # will run when job2+3 are finished
> something
>
> If that's not the case, something is broken. A quick test here seems to
> show that it works.
Its documented. From the manpage that I read several times by now:
Wait for preceding jobs in the job file to exit before starting this one.
stonewall implies new_group.
Somehow despite my reading of manpage, README, HOWTO I came to the thought
that it tells fio to wait for the current job to finish, thus I had the
stonewall options misordered.
I expect that it works exactly as you said and try it this way. Instead of
omitting the last stonewall option in my iops job file I could omit the
first for the first job. Cause the first job does not need to wait for a
previous job.
Thanks,
--
Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de
GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe fio" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[Home]
[Linux SCSI]
[Linux USB Devel]
[Video for Linux]
[Linux Audio Users]
[Photo]
[Yosemite News]
[Yosemite Photos]
[Video Projectors]
[Free Online Dating]
[Linux Kernel]
[Linux SCSI]
[XFree86]