On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 11:56 AM, Jeff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 1:35 PM, Akemi Yagi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 11:23 AM, Jeff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Our experience with HZ=100 in 4.6 kernels was nearly perfect time > sync, at least to within a second over one week. Not so with > divider=10. I will grab the -78 SRPM and give it a spin.
That is very interesting. This is the first time I've heard about the difference between the two with regard to timekeeping problems. Please keep us informed of your testing. Akemi _______________________________________________ CentOS-virt mailing list [email protected] http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
