Re: [perf-discuss] Re: FileBench Discuss

On 11/1/06, Youngjae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Richard, I was also trying to comiple and run filebench on linux environment. But it still has massive problems such as gsl link problem, autoconf/makefiles and so on. Is there any simple way to install and run it on linux? Or is there any binar

[perf-discuss] Re: FileBench Discuss

Richard, I was also trying to comiple and run filebench on linux environment. But it still has massive problems such as gsl link problem, autoconf/makefiles and so on. Is there any simple way to install and run it on linux? Or is there any binary file to run it within linux? Please get us to t

Re: [perf-discuss] Re: FileBench Discuss

Brendan Gregg wrote: G'Day Folks, FileBench looks great. I've been wanting to write such a tool for a while, but this is far more comprehensive than I was planning. :) Yes, it is definetly cool. Imagine using this for a practical Solaris interview. Create a well defined testload with fi

Re: [perf-discuss] Re: FileBench Discuss

Sorry mate :^) A world-class chef would never serve the souffle' until it's perfect, would they? ;^) /jim James Dickens wrote: On 8/11/05, *James Mauro* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: Hey Kevin - In addition to all the good stuff Richard provided, be aw

[perf-discuss] Re: FileBench Discuss

G'Day Folks, FileBench looks great. I've been wanting to write such a tool for a while, but this is far more comprehensive than I was planning. :) Apart from it's own output, which is terribly useful, I've been using it to generate test load for other tools: random uncached 8k reads: $ iostat

[perf-discuss] Re: FileBench Discuss

Hi Kevin, This workload is running out of files to create after 25 seconds, with the default set of 1000 files. The creation phase is pre-defining a fileset of 1000 filenames (without actually creating them), then creating them during the run. So, for a longer run more filenames will be requir

[perf-discuss] Re: FileBench Discuss

Richard: Thanks for creating this workload. I am having some problems with it, though. When running filebench directly (not from runbench), it complains that there is a syntax error and it is expecting a token. filebench> load kevin 4297: 2.479: syntax error, token expected on line 32 The

[perf-discuss] Re: FileBench Discuss

>but I think that to do open development on filebench (or anything else) in the >community, it needs to be compilable using the resources that most people have. I agree. Our initial porting priorities were Solaris in binary/package and Linux in buildable source. Getting the source to build on So

[perf-discuss] Re: FileBench Discuss

>10091: 2.306:run runtime (e.g. run 60) >10091: 2.306: syntax error, token expected on line 51 <-- ERROR MESSAGE >Anybody have a clue on this one (or, is this normal?)? This is something that crept in very recently when the Linux port was integrated. It's not supposed to be there, bu

[perf-discuss] Re: FileBench Discuss

Richard, Yep, I know there's a pre-built binary (and thank you much for that!)... but I think that to do open development on filebench (or anything else) in the community, it needs to be compilable using the resources that most people have. So, I think that probably means: being able to com

[perf-discuss] Re: FileBench Discuss

Using gmake seems to help it a lot! It's better now, but not 100% yet. Here's what I've figured out so far: 1) I overrode MAKE to get gmake, on the configure line. This worked. 2) I can't seem to override CC and CFLAGS at all (overriding them on the ./configure line has no effect), so I had t

[perf-discuss] Re: FileBench Discuss

Hi Mike, The binary package under downloads has both the SPARC and x86/64 versions compiled and built. You should be just able to download, pkgadd and run. Please let me know if this is still an issue? Thanks, Richard. Message was edited by: rmc This message posted from opensolaris.o

[perf-discuss] Re: FileBench Discuss

> Richard, > > I'm trying to compile and run just the X86 version, > n, without the Sparc version, since many in the > community do not have Sparc boxen, and (like me) > they'll want to run this just on X86. I got > filebench to compile (and startup), but I can't seem > to get it to build a packa

[perf-discuss] Re: FileBench Discuss

Richard, I'm trying to compile and run just the X86 version, without the Sparc version, since many in the community do not have Sparc boxen, and (like me) they'll want to run this just on X86. I got filebench to compile (and startup), but I can't seem to get it to build a package without the

Re: [perf-discuss] Re: FileBench Discuss

On 8/11/05, James Mauro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hey Kevin - In addition to all the good stuff Richard provided, be aware that you need to set $USE_XANADU = 1; in bin/runbench to enable the Xanadu post-processing of the data.In your profile (.prof file), set the function to generic_xanadu to enab

[perf-discuss] Re: FileBench Discuss

Hey Kevin - In addition to all the good stuff Richard provided, be aware that you need to set $USE_XANADU = 1; in bin/runbench to enable the Xanadu post-processing of the data. In your profile (.prof file), set the function to generic_xanadu to enable additional statistics gathering; # cat olt

[perf-discuss] Re: FileBench Discuss

Keep in mind that I set the default mean directory width to 10, rather than the 1000 you were looking for. The algorithm uses a gamma distribution by default, so setting it to 10 means there will be a range of directory widths, with a mean of 10. For example: /filebench/readfileset /filebench/

[perf-discuss] Re: FileBench Discuss

Hi Kevin, I'd be happy to help. I had to make a few assumptions, but here's an example. I assumed that you want to create and write files that are on average 10k and read files which are the same size. Here's a simple script which creates a set of files and then does 60% reads of those files,

[perf-discuss] Re: FileBench Discuss

Please disregard the "workspace" reference in the previous post (right under 'Install'). I mistakenly included that in the cut from Richard's WEB site on getting started with filebench. The sourceforge link is the correct place to go for the filebench package. Sorry This message posted from op

[perf-discuss] Re: FileBench Discuss

I'd like to take this opportunity to post some general information on what I picked up recently while using filebench to generate some workloads for file system performance. This will be spread across several replies to this topic. The filebench binaries (for SPARC and x86), as well as filebench

[perf-discuss] Re: FileBench Discuss

Its good to see a public discussion open up on FileBench. I've been playing with it for a while, but would like to create a custom workload. Since workload definition syntax is not (well) documented, I've not been able to confidently build a custom workload. Basically, what I'm trying to mimic

[perf-discuss] Re: FileBench Discuss

Nice. I had some thoughts on this. I noticed that Filebench and libMicro were similar, but different. I think it would be a Good Idea to converge on a common output format. For example, I like the 'tattle' header from libMicro, which tells me absolutely everything I need to know (hopefull