Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Document what the score means #70

Closed
s-h-a-d-o-w opened this issue Aug 9, 2018 · 3 comments
Closed

Document what the score means #70

s-h-a-d-o-w opened this issue Aug 9, 2018 · 3 comments

Comments

@s-h-a-d-o-w
Copy link

I have not been able to find any information on this. The problem I have with it is that it seems inconsistent with the rest of the output, yet the results of the famous CrystalDiskMark are based on it.

Example:

Total IO
thread |       bytes     |     I/Os     |     MB/s   |  I/O per s |  file
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     0 |      2775056384 |        21172 |     529.36 |    4234.88 | cdm (1024MB)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
total:        2775056384 |        21172 |     529.36 |    4234.88

Score: 5550740

It's as if the value in the column MB/s is actually MiB/s and the returned score is in MB/s... (And if that truly is the case, then it seems that the heading for the column should be corrected?)

@DanPear
Copy link
Member

DanPear commented Aug 9, 2018

It appears as if you're using an outdated version of the tool. This change was made in the commit cc45491. The latest update to Diskspd can be downloaded from https://aka.ms/diskspd.

I would also expect that any tools that use Diskspd would specify the -Rxml option and consume the results in XML format. The XmlResultParser would then display the value in bytes. The conventions used are documented under Size conventions for DiskSpd parameters.

@s-h-a-d-o-w
Copy link
Author

My apologies - the above is based on CrystalDiskMark 6.0.1 (which also uses the fact that you used to output the score as exit code). I didn't realize that this has already been addressed...

@DanPear
Copy link
Member

DanPear commented Aug 9, 2018

No worries! Please let us know if you find any issues in the future or if you have any suggestions for improvements.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants