From ricardoreyyy at gmail.com Sat Sep 1 02:34:15 2012 From: ricardoreyyy at gmail.com (Ricardo Rey) Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2012 01:34:15 -0500 Subject: [Disksim-users] How to compile DiskSim 4.0 on 64bit OS In-Reply-To: <2012090111425461519516@smail.hust.edu.cn> References: <2012090111425461519516@smail.hust.edu.cn> Message-ID: Hi! There is a thread from December, 2011, where I asked how to compile on 64 bit. Peter Macko answered with a link to a blog which contains the instructions on how to do it (you have to modify some sources, but applying the patch is quite simple). Just look for that thread and for Peter's answer, and you should be able to compile no problem =) - Rick On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 10:42 PM, fumin wrote: > ** > Hello. > I am new to DiskSim, and want to try it on Ubuntu 64bit. But when I > compile it, I just get some compile errors. > I find some solutions from internet, e.g., adding -m32 gcc flag. > However, after adding -m32 flag I still encounter other problems, e.g., > missing header files due to all header files that I owned are of 64bit > version. > Would simply coping header files of 32bit version to my /usr/include/ > directory makes it work? Or is there a complete guide to help me compiling > DiskSim in 64bit environment? > Thanks. > ------------------------------ > Min Fu > Huazhong University of Science and Technology (HUST) > Wuhan, Hubei, China > > _______________________________________________ > Disksim-users mailing list > Disksim-users at ece.cmu.edu > https://sos.ece.cmu.edu/mailman/listinfo/disksim-users > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nianglao at gmail.com Sat Sep 1 03:58:16 2012 From: nianglao at gmail.com (=?GB2312?B?y+/B+g==?=) Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2012 15:58:16 +0800 Subject: [Disksim-users] disksim raid5 problems Message-ID: Hi, all. I use disksim to simulate RAID5 disk arrays. My parv file is as follows: //--------------------------------------- ...logorg... Addressing mode = Parts, Distribution scheme = Striped, Redundancy scheme = Parity_rotated, ... //--------------------------------------- But when logorg_initialize() run, it change to "maptype = ASIS; logorgs[i]->reduntype = PARITY_TABLE;" instead of "maptype = STRIPED; logorgs[i]->reduntype = PARITY_ROTATED;". Do any one know the reason? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From shzb89 at yahoo.cn Wed Sep 5 00:46:27 2012 From: shzb89 at yahoo.cn (=?utf-8?B?5rKI?=) Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2012 12:46:27 +0800 (CST) Subject: [Disksim-users] new member Message-ID: <1346820387.43062.YahooMailNeo@web92206.mail.cnh.yahoo.com> Hi, ??? I'm a new member. Nice to meet you! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From chensinhome at gmail.com Tue Sep 11 03:52:22 2012 From: chensinhome at gmail.com (=?Big5?B?q0inu7Ov?=) Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 15:52:22 +0800 Subject: [Disksim-users] Disksim-users Digest, Vol 81, Issue 9 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 2012/9/1 > Send Disksim-users mailing list submissions to > disksim-users at ece.cmu.edu > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://sos.ece.cmu.edu/mailman/listinfo/disksim-users > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > disksim-users-request at ece.cmu.edu > > You can reach the person managing the list at > disksim-users-owner at ece.cmu.edu > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Disksim-users digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. disksim parameter ?timescale? problem (??) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2012 19:23:05 +0800 > From: ?? > Subject: [Disksim-users] disksim parameter ?timescale? problem > To: disksim-users at ece.cmu.edu > Message-ID: > 7DMh855FihsBTdm8TRtsCLQRqfg at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Hi! I run disksim with ssd extention with RAID5. When timscale=1.0, the > trace "ssd-postmark-aligned2.trace" run in 30s. But when the timescale=0.1, > it run in 160s! According to the manual of disksim-4.0, timescale > associates with work loads. Why the trace run much longer when the > timescale is much smaller? > when timescale change from 1 to 0.1, the interval between two contiguous requests become larger (10 times? not sure) so, execution time will become longer ~ > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > http://sos.ece.cmu.edu/pipermail/disksim-users/attachments/20120831/ebe0e69b/attachment-0001.html > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Disksim-users mailing list > Disksim-users at ece.cmu.edu > https://sos.ece.cmu.edu/mailman/listinfo/disksim-users > > > End of Disksim-users Digest, Vol 81, Issue 9 > ******************************************** > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From liangxiongxu at gmail.com Wed Sep 26 19:20:13 2012 From: liangxiongxu at gmail.com (leon hsu) Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 16:20:13 -0700 Subject: [Disksim-users] syssim error--------./src/syssim: internal error: last event not completed. Message-ID: Hi guys, When I was testing the system simulator(Disksim) using a big trace file, it runs a long time. However, it shows up the error "./src/syssim: internal error: last event not completed." after 30 minutes (depending on the trace file). Does anybody get into the same trouble before? If you encountered the same error like mine, could you tell me the possible reasons in details about it one by one? That would be very helpful for me. It is not easy to find out the issue. I think the Disksim is not perfect and it has some hidden problems itself. So just write down your experience for me. I am so appreciated for your help!!! Thanks. The below function located in the file syssim_driver.c int main(int argc, char *argv[]) { ........... if (!completed) { fprintf(stderr, "%s: internal error. Last event not completed %d\n", argv[0], i); exit(1); } ............... } Leon -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: