Thanks for the info. I was starting to look at this as well since NTP is important. *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Octave J. Orgeron Solaris Systems Engineer http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/sysadmin/ http://unixconsole.blogspot.com unixconsole at yahoo.com *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
----- Original Message ---- From: Steffen Weiberle <steffen.weibe...@sun.com> To: ldoms-discuss at opensolaris.org Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 12:34:07 PM Subject: [ldoms-discuss] NTP server in an LDom guest domain works With the help of Brian who knows NTP much better than I do, we have confirmed that a T5120 with LDom 1.0.2 and patch 136932-01 can have a guest LDom be an NTP server. The system did not have access to an external clock, and it sychronized to other systems also running Solaris. This was with Solaris 10 5/08 and its NTP software. Note that 5/08 is available since last Tuesday April 15 at the Sun download center. With the patch it is important to not do any tuning of the system clock vi /etc/system. Thanks Steffen Steffen Weiberle wrote: > Greer Reichow wrote: >> Thanks for the help. Can anyone give me the firmware patch number to >> make sure I have the right one? > > For LDom 1.0.2, I am in the process of testing 136932-01 for the T5x20. > > I believe the T2000 one is 136927-01. The numbers are listed on the LDom > 1.0.2 download page. > > Note, these are 1.0.2 patches, not 1.0.1. I was running 1.0.2 with the > 1.0.1 patch, as 136932-01 had not been released yet. > > Steffen > >> Thanks again, >> Greer >> >> On 4/13/08, *Kevin Rathbun* <Kevin.Rathbun at sun.com >> <mailto:Kevin.Rathbun at sun.com>> wrote: >> >> On Sun, Apr 13, 2008 at 03:05:49PM -0400, Steffen Weiberle wrote: >> > Greer Reichow wrote: >> > > All, >> > > I've come across aan interesting problem I'm hoping someone >> has seen >> > > >> > > I have the following in a development environment: >> > > 1)T2000 - 8 core, 32GB RAM >> > > 2)T5120 - 8 core, 32GB RAM >> > > 3)Symmetricom S250 GPS NTP Server >> > > >> > > Both the T2k & 5120 are built off the same jumpstart images >> (solaris 08/07) with ~ 4 ldoms each. Each LDOM is configured with >> 4CPUs and 2 GB RAM. We are running ntp client version 4.2.4 >> downloaded from sunfreeware.com <http://sunfreeware.com>. LDOM >> level is 1.0.1 currently >> > > >> > > Each LDOM on both machines is running the same ntp.conf file: >> > > server <ip> minpoll 4 maxpoll 4 prefer >> > > driftfile /var/ntp/ntp.drift >> > > >> > > While I know this wouldn't be ideal in a large deployment, the >> fact that I have a private DNS stratum 1 server and few clients >> allows me to set the time polling fairly tight. >> > > >> > > Here is the interesting part: >> > > Results of ntpq -c peers >> > > >> > > 5120: >> > > delay offset disp >> > > .061 37.037 0.12 >> > > >> > > T2000: >> > > delay offset disp >> > > .062 .04 0.14 >> > > >> > > Why am I getting such disparate results in offset? The project >> I'm developing this for has very strict timing requirements that the >> T2000 seems to meet (< 10ms accuracy) that the newer 5120 doesn't >> meet. Has anyone seen something similar? Right now this is >> pointing at a hardware issue, but I want to eliminate the ldom code >> as a problem >> > >> > There are clock drifts on the systems that are greater than what >> NTP can >> > handle. Came across this myself just last week. >> > >> > There are /etc/system settings described in Change Request >> 6630235 based >> > on CPU clock frequency. >> > >> > I am looking for a public document that describes these. >> >> >> Not sure about a public doc but here's other info. >> >> 6682970 Clock drift on N2 platforms (Glendale, Monza & Turgo) due to >> spread spectrum >> 6676309 Clock drift in Huron due to spread spectrum >> >> http://blogs.sun.com/blu/entry/spread_spectrum_emi_and_the >> >> kvn >> >> >> >> > >> > Steffen >> > >> > > Thanks, >> > > Greer >> > > -- >> > > This message was posted from opensolaris.org >> <http://opensolaris.org> >> > > _______________________________________________ >> > > ldoms-discuss mailing list >> > > ldoms-discuss at opensolaris.org >> <mailto:ldoms-discuss at opensolaris.org> >> > > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/ldoms-discuss >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > ldoms-discuss mailing list >> > ldoms-discuss at opensolaris.org <mailto:ldoms-discuss at >> opensolaris.org> >> > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/ldoms-discuss >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ldoms-discuss mailing list >> ldoms-discuss at opensolaris.org >> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/ldoms-discuss > > _______________________________________________ > ldoms-discuss mailing list > ldoms-discuss at opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/ldoms-discuss _______________________________________________ ldoms-discuss mailing list ldoms-discuss at opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/ldoms-discuss ____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
