Evandro Menezes wrote: > On Sep 23, 1:37 pm, Evandro Menezes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Here's what I mean:http://img250.imageshack.us/img250/8264/peerstatsde3.png >> (the flat line is for the time that the system was shutdown). > > And, for completeness sake: > http://img259.imageshack.us/img259/7841/loopstatsfh7.png. >
If it's any help, my Windows XP machine also performs poorly with timekeeping. The frequency varies quite a bit and almost seems random, and as a result the offset suffers. Even with default settings the poll interval on its peer rarely exceeds 256, but spends most of its time at 64. One time I set minpoll 4 in the options, to see if a lower poll would help it perform better. It ended up spending most of its time at poll 16, but the performance was a lot better. I keep it at minpoll 4 maxpoll 4 now, with good results compared to what it was. I run the Meinberg NTP distribution, but am considering going back to the Automachron SNTP software ( http://www.oneguycoding.com/automachron/ ) that I used for years. It's easy to configure and it works well for the Windows machines. It's possible that Windows just isn't sophisticated enough for a precise timekeeping implementation like NTP. Although its performance might be better in a server environment rather than a workstation environment. -- Dennis Hilberg, Jr. timekeeper(at)dennishilberg(dot)com NTP Server Information: http://saturn.dennishilberg.com/ntp.php _______________________________________________ questions mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
