On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 5:24 PM jimlux <jim...@earthlink.net> wrote: > On 11/12/20 3:45 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > > -------- > > > >> predicts that d(UT2)/d(TAI) = 1 after 2021-11-13, ie > >> the rates of UTT2 and TAI are expected to agree for the > >> next year. This has never happened since 1961. We may > >> not need to abolish leap seconds for quite a while. > > > > Unless of course we get close enough to a negative one, that people > > are *really* going to freak out. > > > > Hands in the air: Who here besides Warner and me has ever tried to > > test handling of negative leap-seconds ? > > > > not exactly leap seconds, but I had a system that ingested time from two > sources that were nominally synced, and one slipped behind - it was a > gruesome disaster. Time going backwards creates ALL sorts of problems > with log files and locking schemes and telemetry decoding/plotting that > assume that time is monotonically increasing. (we leave, aside, the > whole daylight time issue - that's a "print formatting of time values" > thing. > > > It fills me with great trepidation if clock time were ever to go > backwards. I think what would happen is that people would hack it and > have it sort of run slowly over some seconds, while maintaining > monotonicity. And then create tiger teams to fix it when someone else > did it differently, and your financial system ingested transactions that > appeared to end before they started. >
Well, every positive leap second is time going backwards... At least with a negative leap second time just skips a beat... Warner
_______________________________________________ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs